Judgment · High Court

1t Sri ,Sliivakumar .SBadyariagj Adv) . PETITIONER. ,, RESPONDENT. This Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order passed by the Tribunal on Issue No.2 I.e.. Departmental Enquiry dated 10.06.2003 which is produced and marked as Annexure - and also quash the award passed by the Tribunal dated 20.11.2003 whIch is produced and marked as Annexure - and direct the respondent to restore the increments with all monetary benefits. This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following: ORDER I Party in I.D.No.256/2001 on the file of Industrial Tribunal, Hubli, has come up in this petition Impugning the award dated 20.11.2003 passed therein In dismissing his application filed under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Brief facts leading to this petition are as under: Petitioner herein, a Conductor working in respondent - Corporation, was Issued with a charge sheet for committing certain irregularities in non-Issuing of tickets to seven passengers while discharging his duties on 16.05.1997 In the 3 city of Belgaum. In response to the said charge sheet, he submitted his explanation. In enquiry conducted thereafter, based on the evidence the Enquiry Officer found petitioner herein guilty of the offence alleged. The report of the Enquiry Officer was submitted to Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority on going through the enquiry report and also past record of the petitioner wherein it was found that he was involved in more than ten such similar offence earlier, imposed the punishment reducing his basic to minimum and the period during which he was kept under suspension as period not on duty. Hence no salary or emoluments were permitted to him for the said period.

BeIng aggrieved by the same, petitioner herein Initiated proceedings before the Industrial Tribunal under Section lO(l)(c) of the Act. in the said proceedings, after pleadings were complete, issues were framed, evidence was recorded, thereafter the Industrial Tribunal held that the dispute between the petitioner and respondent corporation is “1 4 industrial dispute and also held that the domestic enqufry conducted by the respondent is fair and proper. Thereafter dismissed the said dispute holding that the order dated

10.08.2000 reducing basic pay of petitioner to the minimum pay scale is just and proper. Being aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

Heard the counsel for petitioner and respondent. Perused the award impugned. On gong through the same, it is clearly seen that despite the practice of ‘issue and start’ being there in the respondent — Corporation, petitioner herein has not issued the tickets to seven passengers, who boarded the bus on 16.05.1997 when the said bus was proceeding near Hari Mandir. Subsequently, when the checking squad entered the bus and found them to be traveling without tickets, petitioner has tried to explain that the said seven passengers boarded the bus little distance before the checking squad entered the bus. That even before he could issue tickets to them, the checking was started and therefore 5 he could not issue the tickets, Is rightly not accepted by the checking squad. Enquiry Officer and Disciplinary Authority.

When the rule of ‘issue and start’ is In force, petitioner pennitting the bus to proceed before issuance of ticket Is itseff an offence in strictly not following the rule of ‘issue and start’. In that view of the matter, petitioner herein has miserably failed to establish that he Is innocent of the charges levelled against him. The Disciplinary Authority has therefore rightly accepted the finding of enquiry officer and after considering his past record has rightly Imposed the aforesaid penalty. In the Instant case, the guilt of the petitioner Is established beyond reasonable doubt. The enquiry is held to be fair and proper. In such an event, it Is not desirable to interfere with the order passed by the disciplinary authority which has not only considered the present offence but also the earlier misconduct of the petitioner before deciding about the punishment to be imposed. The Tribunal after taking Into consideration these 6 aspects has rightly dismissed the dispute raised by the petitioner in ID.No.256/2001. In that view of the matter. this Court find that there is no Justifiable reason to Interfere with passed Industrial Thbunal I.D.No.256/2001 In dismissing his application under Section 1O( 1)(c) of the Act and also refusing to Interfere with the order of the disciplinary authority dated 10.08.2000.