Telangana High Court
V.Dilip Raj vs The Depot Manager on 28 June, 2023
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.21745 of 2021
ORDER:
1. Heard, Sri P.Venkateswar Rao, Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Thoom Srinivas, the Learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.1.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as conductor in the Respondent- Corporation and while he was performing his duties in Bus No.AP 11 Z-6131 on route No.10H, surprise check was exercised at stage No.6 (Venkatagiri) and found that one passenger was travelling with ticket bearing No.TNA10269 with denomination of Rs.11/-. In fact, the petitioner has issued the ticket to the alleged passenger who boarded into the bus at Kothaguda stage to Usha Kiran stage on Page 2 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J 24.02.2015. But, the alleged passenger over-ride in the bus up-to Venkatagiri stage No.6 and given a wrong statement that he boarded the bus at Peddammagudi stage and bound to alight at Yousufguda stage.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of conducting enquiry not examined the checking officers about tallying of the tickets and passengers and the checking officers also not mentioned the proper addresses of the alleged passenger and co-passengers. The said action of the respondents is in violation of the Circular given by Respondent-Corporation in Circular No.04/2008- OPD(HES) dated 08.02.2008 and Para No.4 of the said Circular clearly stating that the checking officials should collect evidence of fellow passengers or drivers of the buses wherever possible and also record full addresses of the passengers connected with irregularities, witnesses, if any, Page 3 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J while framing charges. In the instant case the Respondent- Corporation without examining the passengers and without following the Circular proceedings issued removal order against the petitioner in proceedings dated 10.06.2015 for cash irregularity of an amount of Rs.11/-.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Labour Court given a finding that the quantum of the amount is immaterial and the fair conduct was the utmost requirement and such fair conduct is lacking on the part of the petitioner and dismissed the I.D.No.04 of 2018 and the said finding is without taking into account of the Circulars and also the law laid-down by this Court in number of occasions.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the punishment of removing from the service is shockingly disproportionate to the alleged misconduct against the Page 4 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J petitioner. The respondents without following the procedure as prescribed by the Corporation and issued the impugned proceedings of removal from service for mere irregularities of Rs.11/- and the same was unwarranted. The Labour Court also without looking into the procedure contemplated in Rules and Circulars dismissed the I.D and the same is arbitrary and illegal and requested to allow the writ petition.
6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions placed reliance on the following Judgments of this Court.
1. M.Narayana Vs. Additonal Industrial Tribunal and others 1
2. K.L.Narayana Vs Depot Manager,Rani Gunj Depot,APSRTC 2 1 Unreported Judgment in WP No.29695 of 2008 Dated 03.10.2013 of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh 2 Unreported Judgment in WP No.25668 OF 2006 Dated 08.10.2018 of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh Page 5 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J
7. On the other hand, the Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents basing on the counter-affidavit submits that the checking officials detected the cash and ticket irregularities by the petitioner and during the course of check and the checking officials found that one passenger was travelling with used ticket of Rs.11/-. The checking officials recorded the statement of the passenger and recovered the document and they issued the Charge Memo on the spot explanation. The Enquiry Officer submitted the report in which held that the after considering the material record and explanation of the petitioner, the charge was proved and basing on the report, the respondents passed final orders of termination on 10.06.2015 and the petitioner approached the Labour Court after the lapse of two years and filed I.D.No.4 of 2018. The Labour Court taking into account of the facts and evidence and rightly dismissed the I.D and there is no illegality in the orders passed by the Page 6 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J Labour Court and the award does not call for any interference of this Court and requested to dismiss the petition.
8. After hearing the both sides and perusing the records, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner worked as a contract Conductor in the Respondent-Corporation and a surprise check was conducted by the ticket checking authority on 24.02.2015 and found that one passenger was travelling with the ticket for an amount of Rs.11/- denomination which was a used ticket. The respondents conducted enquiry and basing on the enquiry report the respondents have issued impugned removal orders to the petitioner on 10.06.2015. The contention of the petitioner is that the punishment of removal imposed on the ground of ticket and cash irregularity of Rs.11/- and the same is shockingly Page 7 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J disproportionate. Moreover, at the time of ticket checking, the respondents without following the Circulars issued by the Corporation, conducted the enquiry and the Labour Court without taking into account of the same dismissed the award and the same is liable to be set-aside.
9. As per the Circular No.04/2008-OPD(HES), dated 08.02.2008 in Para No.4, the checking officials should collect evidence of fellow passengers or drivers of buses wherever possible and also record full addresses of the passengers connected with irregularities and witnesses, if any, while framing charges. In the present case, the Enquiry Officer without examining the passengers and without following the Circular proceedings conducted enquiry and basing on the said enquiry report, removal order was issued against the petitioner for cash irregularity of an amount of Rs.11/- in the impugned proceedings dated 10.06.2015. Page 8 of 10
WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J
10. The specific case of the petitioner before the Labour Court that the passenger was not produced in the enquiry, in spite of his request and he lost his opportunity of cross-examining the passenger and the disciplinary authorities have not examined these facts and passed the termination orders and the same is illegal on the ground that the enquiry was conducted in contrary to the Circulars issued by the Respondent-Corporation from time to time. The Labour Court while disposing of the I.D. without taking into account of the contention of the petitioner and stated that the punishment of removal is not disproportionate on the ground that the Respondent-Corporation has lost the faith on the petitioner.
11. The punishment of the removal imposed by the Respondent-Corporation is shockingly disproportionate for the meager amount of Rs.11/- of ticket and cash Page 9 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J irregularities. The Labour Court ought to have taken into consideration that the disciplinary authority without following the Circulars for conducting the departmental enquiry and issued present impugned orders of removal from service and the Labour Court cannot take into account of the earlier incidents which were not subject matter of the enquiry and the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
12. Since the punishment of the removal is shockingly disproportionate to the charge against the petitioner, this Court feels that the Respondent-Corporation is to be directed to reinstate the petitioner into the service as conductor.
13. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is disposed of by setting-aside the impugned removal order passed by the respondent No.1 in Proc.No.02/95(6)/2015-HCU, dated 10.06.2015, consequential review order dated 06.01.2016 passed by the Regional Manager/Hyderabad Region and Page 10 of 10 WP No.21745 OF 2021 SK, J revision order dated 29.03.2016 passed by the Executive Director/GHZ & IT and also the order passed in I.D.No.4 of 2018, dated 26.03.2021 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I with a direction to the Respondent- Corporation to reinstate the petitioner into the service as conductor, without back wages and other attendant benefits. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
14. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date:28.06.2023 spk