S.Narsimulu vs The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C.
2022 Latest Caselaw 770 Tel

                                       1



      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

                                      AND

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                            WRIT APPEAL No.12 of 2008

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)



01.          This Writ Appeal is filed aggrieved by the order

dated 29.08.2007 passed in W.P.No.24709 of 1998 by the

learned Single Judge.

02.          Heard Sri V.Narasimha Goud, learned counsel for

the appellant and Sri N.Praveen Kumar Reddy, learned

Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent-Corporation.

03. It is the case of the appellant that he was appointed

as a Conductor in the 1st respondent-Corporation and he has

been discharging his duties to the best satisfaction of his

superiors. On 12.09.1991, while he was conducting the bus, a

check was exercised by the respondent-Corporation and it was

noticed that he was indulged in cash and ticket irregularities.

The disciplinary authority has initiated disciplinary proceedings

against him by issuing a charge memo and the appellant has

submitted his explanation denying the said charges. Being not

satisfied with the explanation submitted by him, the disciplinary

authority has appointed an Enquiry Officer and after

conducting a detailed enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted a

report stating that the charges levelled against the appellant

were proved. Based upon the Enquiry Officer's report, the

disciplinary authority has imposed a major punishment of

removal on 04.12.1991. Thereafter, the appellant has preferred

an Appeal and the same was also dismissed. Later, he filed

I.D.No.94 of 1993 before the Labour Court, Hyderabad, under

Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour

Court allowed the same vide Award dated 21.12.1996 by setting

aside the removal order and directed the Corporation to

reinstate the appellant into service with all attendant benefits

such as continuity of service, however with 25% back wages.

In pursuance of the Award passed by the Labour Court, the

appellant was reinstated into service. Challenging the said

Award, the respondent-Corporation filed W.P.No.24709 of

1998 before this Court and this Court quashed the Award

passed by the Labour Court. Aggrieved by the same, the

present Writ Appeal is filed.

04. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant had

contended that pursuant to the Award dated 21.12.1996 in

I.D.No.94 of 1993 passed by the Labour Court, the appellant

was reinstated into service and now the appellant is willing to

forego the back wages awarded by the Labour Court. Learned

counsel had further contended that the Labour Court has

granted 25% of the back wages and during the pendency of the

writ petition, the appellant has withdrawn 12½ % of the back

wages and the only issue which needs to be adjudicated in the

present appeal is in respect of remaining 12½ % of the back

wages. Learned counsel had further contended that the order

passed by the learned Single Judge be set aside so as to enable

the appellant to continue in service as he had already reinstated

into service in pursuance of the Award passed by the Labour

Court.

05. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondent-Corporation had contended that the learned Single

Judge has allowed the writ petition and passed a detailed order

and no interference is called for by this Court. Therefore, there

are no merits in the writ appeal and the same is liable to be

dismissed.

06. Having considered the rival submissions made by

the learned counsel on either side and in the peculiar facts and

circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view

that in order to give a quietus to the long pending dispute

between the parties, ends of justice would be met if the

reinstatement of the appellant is upheld, subject to condition

that the appellant would forego balance 12½ % of back wages,

awarded by the Labour Court as the appellant was already

reinstated into service in pursuance of the Award passed by the

Labour Court.

07. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed and the order

dated 29.08.2007 in W.P.No.24709 of 1998 passed by the

learned Single Judge is set aside, as the appellant was already

reinstated into service in pursuance of the Award passed by the

Labour Court, subject to condition that the appellant shall

forego balance 12½ % of back wages. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

____________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

Date:18.02.2022 rkk