The Depot Manager vs U.B. Nagaiah And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 4382 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                       AND
            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


                   WRIT APPEAL No.917 of 2019

JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)




     The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated

11.12.2018 passed in W.P.No.16594 of 2002 by the learned

Single Judge.

     The      facts        of      the        case         reveal        that   the

respondent/employee was serving on the post of Conductor,

who was suffering from Tuberculosis, was unauthorisedly

absent for about 196 days for the period with effect from

17.04.1988 to 16.05.1989 and he did submit medical

certificates to the employer. However, a charge sheet was

issued on 23.05.1989 in respect of the unauthorized absence

and an enquiry officer conducted an enquiry. Thereafter, the

disciplinary authority has passed an order of removal from

service on 23.02.1991. The employee preferred a petition

under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and

the Labour Court has passed an award on 05.05.2000 and in

place of removal, the employee was reinstated into service

with continuity of service but without back wages and

awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments without

cumulative effect. The award of the Labour Court is on

record. Paragraphs 10 to 14 of the award passed by the

Labour Court are reproduced as under:

"10. Heard both sides and perused record.

POINTS 1 & 2

11. In the rejoinder, it is clearly mentioned that the workman having long absented to his duties have submitted combined medical + fitness certificate by a private Doctor. The Rule 20 in APSRTC Regulations reads as follows:-

"Habitual late attendance, irregular attendance, absence without leave and "without reasonable cause" and absent without permission and wasting time or loitering while on duty".

12. In this case, it is the contention of the workman that he was suffering from T.B. + Asthama, so there is a reasonable cause for his absence and submitted medical certificates for his absence, therefore the removal of the workman from service by the respondent is not justified one. thus, these points answered accordingly.

13. In view of my discussion supra, the respondent is directed to reinstate the workman into service with continuity of service but without back wages, while withholding 3 annual increments without cumulative effect.

14. In the result, the I.D. is partly allowed accordingly without costs."

Undisputedly, the employee was suffering from

Tuberculosis and Asthama and there was a reasonable cause

for his absence. He was admitted to hospital and medical

certificates were produced before the employer and therefore,

the Labour Court was justified in interfering with the

quantum of punishment in exercise of powers conferred

under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned

Single Judge was certainly justified in dismissing the writ

petition. This Court also does not find any reason to interfere

with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

______________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 16.12.2021 ES