Delhi District Court
Labour Court/208/1989 on 22 January, 2009
ID No. 208/89(Old)
ID No.319/08(New)
IN THE COURT OF DR. SHAHABUDDIN, PRESIDING OFFICER,
LABOUR COURT NO. IX, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, EAST
DISTRICT : DELHI
I.D. No. 208/89 (Old)
I.D. No. 319/08 (New)
Date of Institution : 20.02.1989
Date on which award reserved : 20.01.2009
Date of passing of award : 22.01.2009
BETWEEN
Its workman Sh. Daya Nand, S/o Sh. Ram Sarup, C/o Sh. R.N. Guglani,
Chamber No. 450, Civil Wing, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi - 54.
AND
M/s. Haryana Roadways, (The General Manager), Banda Bahadur Marg,
Delhi9.
AWARD
1.The Secretary (Labour), Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi, has referred this dispute arising between the parties named above for adjudication to this Labour Court vide Notification No. F.24(292)/ 89/Lab.4195200 dated 01.02.89 with the following terms of reference.
"Whether dismissal of Sh. Daya Nand from service is illegal and/or unjustified; and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect?"
2. The main averments as made in the statement of claim of the workman are to the effect that he had been placed under suspension Page 1 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) illegally and malafidely by General Manager, Haryana Roadways vide letter no. EA/2372 dated 31.08.84; that the same is void and illegal; that there were no serious charges of misconduct against him; that during the period of suspension, he was required to attend the office daily; that the domestic enquiry was conducted against him by the enquiry officer without following the principles of natural justice; that reasonable and fair opportunities of being heard were not provided to him during such domestic enquiry; that no passengers were travelling without tickets in the concerned Bus on due date and time as alleged against him; that false allegations were made against him by and on behalf of the management in this regard in order to do away with his services without any justified reasons; that even the subsistence allowance was not paid to him during the domestic enquiry proceedings. Lastly, a prayer was made for his reinstatement with full back wages and all other consequential benefits as per law.
3. The averments of the statement of claim were strongly denied in the written statement (in short WS) filed on behalf of the management. It was mentioned in the WS, inter alia, that there were serious charges of dereliction of duty committed by the workman; that suspension order passed against him was validly passed; that the enquiry proceedings for alleged misconduct of the workman were held in accordance with the principles of natural justice; that all reasonable and fair opportunities of being heard were provided to him and if he did not avail the same Page 2 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) intentionally, the management cannot be held liable for the same; that principles of natural justice were fully observed during the domestic enquiry conducted against the workman for his alleged misconduct; that nothing was due to him against the management. Lastly, a prayer was made to dismiss his statement of claim.
4. In the rejoinder filed to WS, averments made in the statement of claim were reiterated and those made in the WS were denied.
5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed in this case on 30.07.1990:
1. Whether the domestic enquiry held by the management is fair and proper?
2. As in terms of reference.
6. Issue no. 1 was treated as preliminary issue and evidence on this issue was invited from both the sides.
7. It is pertinent to mention here that after recording evidence on this issue from both sides, the Ld. Predecessor of this court decided the enquiry issue in favour of the workman and against the management vide his order dated 20.5.1999. The management challenged that order and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court set aside that order in CWP no. 3432/2000 passed on 07.2.2007 remanding this case back to this court allowing the management an opportunity to lead evidence on merits and further directing this court to pass the award on merits after hearing both sides.
8. MW1/A Sh. B.K. Sharma and MW2/A Sh. Jagdish Chander Tyagi respectively were examined on merits on behalf of management and they Page 3 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) also filed their respective affidavits Ex. MW1/AI and Ex. MW2/AI on record in support of the contentions of the management.
9. WW1A Sh. Mange Ram and WW2A Sh. Dayanand respectively were examined on behalf of workman on merits and they also filed their respective affidavits on record in support of the contentions of the workman.
10. I have already heard oral final arguments in this matter from both sides.
11. During the course of oral final arguments on behalf of workman, the main submissions were to the effect that no wrong was committed by the workman at any point time; that no one was travelling in the Bus in question without tickets as alleged by the management; that services of the workman were terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the management; that workman was not allowed reasonable and fair opportunities of being heard during the course of domestic enquiry conducted against him and that the enquiry proceedings were held without observing the principles of natural justice. Lastly, a prayer was made to declare the domestic enquiry not being held fairly and properly against the workman and further request was made for his reinstatement with full back wages and all other consequential benefits as per law.
12. On the other hand, the main submissions on behalf of the management were to the effect that several passengers were travelling in the Bus concerned without tickets in connivance with the workman on Page 4 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) due date and time when he was employed as a Conductor on that Bus; that it was serious act of fraud/misconduct committed by the workman; that a proper domestic enquiry was held against the workman by giving him all fair and reasonable opportunities of being heard during the domestic enquiry; that charges were duly proved against the workman at the conclusion of domestic enquiry; that nothing was due to the workman against the management; that in view of the seriousness of the charges leveled against the workman and duly proved at the conclusion of the enquiry proceedings, the workman does not deserve any leniency as regards the punishment awarded to him by the management in this matter. Lastly, a prayer was made to declare the domestic enquiry being held against the workman as fairly and properly and with a further prayer that the workman was not entitled to any relief against the management.
13. I perused the entire judicial file minutely in view of the above mentioned rival submissions and my issuewise decision is as under: ISSUE NO. 1
14. As regards this issue pertaining to domestic enquiry, I am of the considered opinion that it already stands decided and in my further considered opinion, there is no need to deal with this issue afresh at this stage.
ISSUE NO. 2
15. On this issue, I refer to the evidence of the witnesses examined in this case from the side of the management. MW1/A admitted in his cross Page 5 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) examination that they had been standing at Bhupania Bus stand outside the village; that the passengers told them that the Conductor had taken the Bus fair but had not issued tickets to them; that they did not record the statements of the passengers; that he i.e. MW1/A did not challan any passenger for travelling without ticket; that the Bus was full to its sitting capacity; that he could not say if the student pass was issued to students from Bhupania to Daboda; that he prepared the report in the office.
16. MW2/A admitted in his crossexamination that they were standing on the first bus stand of Bhupania; that the bus was local Bus; that they checked the Bus at about 7 pm; that the Bus was full to its capacity; that there might be one or two students in the Bus; that he did not know up to which stand the management used to issue passes to the students; that there were two Bus stops between Bahadurgarh and Bhupania; that it was correct that passengers used to board and alight from the Bus at every Bus stop; that when they checked the Bus, 30 passengers were found without tickets; that they did not challan any passengers who were found travelling without tickets; that he did not remember the Bus fare from Delhi to Badli; that statements of passersby were also not recorded; that the report was written in the office after 2/4 days when they returned to the office; that he did not write the report but it was written by Sh. B.K. Sharma; that he did not get his affidavit prepared; that they did not check the cash of the conductor.
17. In view of the above mentioned depositions of the witnesses of the Page 6 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) management, I am of the considered opinion that these witnesses had not conducted the checking of the Bus on due date and time fairly and properly. I am further of the considered view that these witnesses, who checked the conductor of the Bus on due date and time, ought to have recorded the statements of some of the passengers who were allegedly travelling without tickets in that Bus and who were allegedly not issued the tickets by the Conductor/workman herein. I am further of the considered opinion that the checking staff ought to have checked the cash of the conductor so that it could be ascertained with certainity as to whether he had committed any embezzlement of any cash amount while not issuing the tickets to the passengers as alleged against him. I am further of the considered opinion that report to this effect ought to have been prepared at the spot itself rather than 2/4 days later after checking of the Bus and that too in the office. Preferably the statements of some passersby ought to have been recorded by checking staff in order to prove the genuineness of the report of the checking staff.
18. It has also come on record from the oral evidence of the witnesses of the management coupled with other material on record, that some students were also travelling in that Bus and as usual, such students are issued concessional passes by the management from time to time and this fact also not denied by witnesses of management. The passes of the students were not checked by the checking staff as revealed from judicial file. In such circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the Page 7 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) Conductor/workman herein really allowed the passengers to travel in the Bus without tickets and simultaneously taking the Bus fares from them.
19. No satisfactory explanation has come on record from the side of the management as to why such casual checking of the Bus was done by the inspecting staff on due date and time and as to why the report about such incident was prepared about 2/4 days after the checking of the Bus and that too in the office. On the basis of above mentioned discussion coupled with entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record, I am of the considered opinion that the workman herein was not at fault and his services had been terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the management. Hence, the charges levelled by management against the workman do not stand duly proved. Hence this issue is accordingly decided against the management and in favour of the workman. RELIEF:
20. On the point of relief to be awarded to the workman in this matter, I am of the considered opinion that the matter is very old pertaining to the year 1989. The management had lost complete confidence in the workman and had put him under suspension initially and thereafter removed him from service. In view of these reasons, reinstatement of the workman with the management is not considered to be the appropriate relief in this matter at this stage.
21. So far as the awarding of the compensation to the workman is concerned, I am of the considered view that the workman has not led any Page 8 of 9 ID No. 208/89(Old) ID No.319/08(New) satisfactory evidence on record, either oral or documentary, to the effect that he remained unemployed throughout from the date of termination of his services by the management till date. He is a trained person and the possibility of his full or partial employment in the intervening period cannot be completely ruled out.
22. On the basis of above mentioned discussion, I am of the considered view that a lumpsum compensation of Rs. Two Lacs only to be paid to the workman by the management would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the management is directed to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs. Two Lacs only to the workman within one month from the date of publication of this award in this matter. The award is passed to the above effect and the reference is answered accordingly.
23. A copy of this Award be sent to the Secretary (Labour), Govt. of NCT of Delhi for publication as per rules and judicial file be consigned to Record Room as per rules.
Announced in the open court (Dr. SHAHABUDDIN)
today i.e. on 22.01.2009. Presiding Officer
Labour Court No. IX
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
Page 9 of 9