Karnataka High Court
Altaf @ Mohammed Altaf vs The Chief Traffic Manager on 11 September, 2009
Author: H.G.Ramesh
Bench: H.G.Ramesh
W.P.NO.22178/2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 117 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 1H. &G. RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO.22178 OF 2009 {L-K)
BETWEEN:
ALTAF @ MOHAMMED. ALTAF
S/O LATE MOrAMMED YUSUFF.,
AGED 33 YEARS, .
DRIVER, TOKEN NO. 9142,
RESIDIENT-OF NOOR NO,120,
MARENAHALH, 282°C' BLOCK,
514 BLOCK, JAYANAGAR;
BANGALORE -- 560 O41. os .. PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LAKSH MAN RAD; ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
. THE CHIEF "TRAFFIC MANAGER
"AND APPOINTING AUTHORITY,
B.M.T.C.,.CENTRAL OFFICES,
_ K.H-RGAD,
~. BANGALORE - 560 027. ... RESPONDENT
- (BY SRILH.SUBHASH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE . FOR SRI.L.GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE} This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned award passed in J.D. No.71/083 by the IIT Addl. Labour Court at Bangalore dated 5.3.2009 vide Annexure-'A' and etc. W.P.NO.22178 /2009 This petition coming on for Preliminary wioaie in 'B' Group this day, the Court made the * following: a None appears for the petitioner 'though the © petition is called for the second time. 1 have heard the learned counsel appearing for 'the. respondent and perused the impugned award ai Atimexure- A.
2. This writ * petition by-a trainee driver whose name had been remov ed fr rom the. 'select list' of drivers is directed against the. , award dated 05.03.2009 (Annexure A) passed - by the TI] Additional Labour a Court, Pangalore "in I.D. No.71/2008. By the : : impugned award, the labour Court has dismissed the petition filed u/s 10(4-A) of the I.D.Act (as amended in o Karnataka) to set aside the order of removal dated 23.05.2003.
3. The petitioner who was working as a trainee driver was subjected to a disciplinary enquiry on the allegation that he had obtained the job of the W.P.NO.22178/2009 driver by producing a fake transfer certificate ~ the select list of drivers as per' the -order dated 03.05.2003-Annexure-C.
4. The petitioner being "aggrieved. by the aforesaid order of his removal from, sérvice'raised' an industrial dispute by filing a petition under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial "Disputes "Act, 1947 as amended in Karnotaka. The Labour Court, on consideration of the matter, found that the domestic enquiry held was fair and proper arid on reconsideration of the evidence, has held that the misconduct alleged against the petitioner was proved:, It is relevant to refer to the following reasoning of the Labour Court.
a) 1. On perusal of the records produced by the management, it is evident that the articles of charge was issued to the I Party regarding the production of bogus Transfer Certificate at the time of obtaining employment and it is marked at Ex.M.5. It appears that the management W.P.NO.22178/2909 contacted the Head Mistress, Governmenié Urdit.~ - .
Higher Primary School, Vijinapura, umherein it is observed that the Transfer. Certifiea te oe produced by the I Party was not issued from | that School. During the course of the' enquiry. :
one Cheluvaiah has given his statement as per Ex.M.3. He has given a state ment that he had contacted the Head Mistr ESS, Government Urdu Higher Primary School, Viinapura and they have stated 'that the I Party did not study in their scheol and" the 'Transfer Certificate No. 126/ /a9- 90 does not belong to their school. On the other hand, it is the defence of the I Party. that he had siudied in Government Urdu _ boys Middle School, Sultanpet, Bangalore and
- thai he. has produced the document in support : of the sarne. The management has produced = ExXM.9... the original Transfer Certificate * produced by the I Party at the time of obtaining 'Ais employment. There is also report of "Cheluvaiah at Ex.M.10. This fact is again corroborated by the letter of the Head Mistress, Government Urdu Higher Primary School, Vijinapura, Dooravaninagar, Bangalore. Placing reliance on these documents and the oral evidence of both parties, the Enquiry \\ 8 W.P.NO.22178/2009 Officer has given his report to the fact that the . ° = charges are proved against the I Party. ~ a
12. On the other hand, it appears that. the i | Party is placing reliance on Ex. M. 14 the.
Transfer Certificate issued by the Covernment Urdu Boys Middle School, Sultanpet to contend that it belongs to him. Ti appears that Ex.M. 14 Transfer Certificate we, issued 'ort 1.3.2000. Similarly. the. I. Pariy has also. 'sworn to an affidanit . pefore. a Me jagistrate Court on
27. 1.200 d] in respect of his name. Both these documents have come into existence recently and' there is. no reason to discredit the a statement of the Head Mistress and the other
- documents produced by the management. For
-- these reasons, it has to be held that the finding
- given: bij the Enquiry Officer cannot be termed . as perverse. Therefore, the issue No.2 has to be answered in the 'positive'."
5. I find no legal infirmity in the above reasoning of the Labour Court. The finding of misconduct recorded by the Labour Court is based on a _ proper consideration of the evidence on record and hence it is
-6- 7 W.P.NO.22178/2009 not permissible for this Court to interfere with such a Supreme Court in MGNT., MADURANTAKAM CO-NP,_ 'SUGAR MILLS LIMITED vs. S. VISWANATHAN 'AIR 2005 SC 1954). Further, the punishment of removal of his name from the select lis! is also in conformity with the law laid by the Supreme Const in UNION OF INDIA vs. M.BHASKARAN (AIR 1996 SC 686).
6. I find no legal infirmity in the impugned award to warrant .. 7 interference. - 'under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
: Petition dismissed.
Sd/-
ludge
-- AHB/Ata