Telangana High Court
D. Dharmaiah, Khammam District vs The Depot Manager, Khammam ... on 22 April, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL No.304 of 2009
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of an order
dated 24.04.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.9015 of 2008.
The facts of the case reveal that the appellant/writ
petitioner (employee) was employed as a conductor in the
services of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport
Corporation (APSRTC) in the year 1987 and while he was
on duty on 30.05.2003, a surprise check was conducted by
the authorities and certain cash and ticket irregularities
were noticed. Therefore, a charge sheet was issued on
06.06.2003. Nine charges were levelled against the
employee, which are reproduced as under:-
"1. For having failed to observe the rule issue and
start while you were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-
1979 on the route Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-
2
2003, which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (vi)(a)
and (xxxi) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg. 1963.
2. For having issued lower denomination ticket
bearing No.456/922305 of Respondents.1.00 deno., in
spite of collecting the requisite fare of Rs.3/- from a lady
passenger who boarded your bus at Chintoor and found
alighting at Narsingapeta, ex-stages from 18 to 19 while
you were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on the
route Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which
constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (xxv) of APSRTC
Employees (Conduct) Reg.1963.
3. For having issued lower denomination ticket of
Re.1/- bearing No.456/922302 in spite of collecting the
requisite fare of Rs.13-00 from a passenger who boarded
your bus at Chintoor and bound for Peddamattapally,
ex-stages from 18 to 24/25 while you were conducting
the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on the route Bhadrachalam -
Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which constitutes misconduct
under Reg 28 (xxv) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct)
Reg.1963.
4. For having collected the requisite fare of Rs.3/-
each from two passengers, who boarded your bus at
Chintoor and found alighting at Narsingapeta ex-stages
from 18 to 19 and failed to issue them tickets while you
were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on the route
Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which
constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (vi) (a) and (xxxi)
of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg. 1963.
5. For having collected the requisite fare of Rs.3/-
from a lady passenger and failed to issue ticket who
boarded your bus at Chintoor and found alighting at
Narsingapeta ex-stages from 18 to 19 while you were
conducting the vehicle No.AP92-1979 on the route
Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which
constitutes misconduct under Reg 28 (vi) (a) and (xxxi)
of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg.1963.
6. For having collected Rs.7/- at the boarding point
itself from a lady passenger and failed to issue her the
requisite ticket who boarded your bus at Chintoor and
bound for Choppala ex-stages from 18 to 21/22 while
you were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on the
route Bhadrachalam Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which
constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (vi) (a) and (xxxi)
of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg.1963.
7. For having allowed un-accompanied luggage of
six quintals of rice in the form of twelve bags and failed
to issue luggage tickets even after collecting an amount
of Rs.240/- for transportation of said luggage from
Bhadrachalam to V.R.Puram ex-stages from 1 to 26
while you were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on
the route Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-2003,
which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (vi) (a) and
(xxxi) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg.1963.
8. For having forcibly taken over the confiscated
tickets along with passengers statement from the hands
of TTIs and torned them into pieces during the course of
check while you were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-
1979 on the route Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-05-
2003, which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (xxxi)
and (xxxii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg. 1963.
9. For having not acknowledged the charge memo as
well as TTIs check report at the time of check while you
were conducting the vehicle No.AP9Z-1979 on the route
Bhadrachalam - Pocharam on 30-5-2003, which
constitutes misconduct under Reg.28 (xxxi) and (xxxii)
of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg. 1963."
The employee did submit a reply and finally an
enquiry was held strictly following the statutory provisions
governing the field. The enquiry officer held the employee
guilty of the misconduct and in those circumstances, an
order of removal was passed on 16.01.2004. Thereafter, an
appeal was preferred and it was dismissed. The review
petition was also dismissed. The employee thereafter filed
I.D.No.89 of 2005 under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, which was dismissed on 05.07.2007
upholding the order of removal.
Learned counsel for the employee has argued before
this Court that all the charges, based upon the evidence,
were not proved and a major punishment has been
inflicted upon the employee.
This Court has carefully gone through the award and
the same reveals that the employee was a habitual
offender, he was earlier also punished for misconduct
involving cash and ticket irregularities (misappropriation),
he was placed under suspension, his annual increments
were deferred several times and in spite of the fact that
leniency was shown to him on earlier occasions, he has
committed misconduct of cash and ticket irregularities
(misappropriation). The award passed by the Labour Court
reveals that there was no infirmity in the departmental
enquiry and the misconduct was proved even before the
Labour Court. The learned Single Judge, in exercise of writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
has declined to interfere with the award passed by the
Labour Court.
This Court has carefully gone through the award and
the order of the learned Single Judge and does not find any
reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned
Single Judge in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case.
The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
______________________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
22.04.2022
vs
