Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and award dated 26.04.2002 passed by Presiding Officer Labour Court, Gorakhpur, which was published on 28.05.2003.

2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to the present petition are that the respondent No. 1 was the employee of the petitioner and was working on the post of conductor attached with Deoria depot. He has been dismissed from the service on the ground that he was conductor of the bus No. UAA-9643 on Lar Deoria route. On 25.10.1994, Traffic Inspector Shri S.N. Tripathi checked the aforesaid bus near Salempur Bale and found that out of 30 passengers, 24 passengers were travelling without ticket and from the blank book a consolidated ticket of 24 passengers was prepared for Rs. 72/-. The entry of the said tickets was made in road paper and the checking details were mentioned and after writing the remark in the road paper when Sri S.N. Singh, Assistant Traffic Inspector was going to put his signature, Rajendra Prasad, respondent No. l snatched the way-bill and threatened for dire consequences and misbehaved with the checking officer. In the explanation, respondent No. 1 stated that there was no person without ticket when the checking was made at Salempur Bale. The passengers boarded the bus at Salempur and the preparation of the ticket was in process and the checking inspector has illegally treated them without ticket. He has refused to have given any threatening and misbehaour. After the enquiry, employee was found guilty and the enquiry officer has given report on 28.03.1995 in which the allegation made against the employee that with the view to destroy the evidence, he had snatched the way-bill to destroy the evidence and had threatened with dire consequence and misbehaved with the checking officer could not be proved. However, rest of the charges were found correct. Sri Ajay Singh, Regional Manager in his order dated 10.04.1995 has stated that the driver of the bus Ram Singhasan Pandey in his letter dated 26.10.1994 has stated that when Rajendra Prasad was asked to sign the way-bill, instead of putting the signature he has snatched the way-bill. He has also stated the same thing in his statement dated 21.03.1993. It has also been stated that on snatching, some of the pages of way-bill were torned and taking into account the seriousness of the charges, dismissed the respondent No. 1. Apart from the amount given towards subsistence allowance, rest of the amount is forfeited. Labour Court vide order dated 06.03.2000 has not found internal enquiry proper and fair has provided opportunity to the parties to prove the charges.

9. In the case Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C., Etawah v. Hoti Lal and Anr. (Supra), the employee was a bus conductor and when he was on duty Assistant Regional Manager checked the bus and found 16 persons were travelling without ticket. Even after realising fare from the passenger no ticket was issued up to the time of checking. When the inspecting officers started checking, the respondent hurriedly tried to issue tickets. Old tickets were found in his possession with the intent to use them again. The employee was suspended and was finally terminated. The order of the termination was challenged in the High Court. Learned Single Judge of the High Court upheld the termination. However, Division Bench held that since the alleged misconduct has caused loss to the State to the extent of Rs. 16/- only, the punishment awarded was not commensurate with the charge and thus, set aside the order of the termination leaving it open to the employer to award any punishment, other than removal or termination or compulsory retirement. The matter went in appeal before the Apex Court. Apex Court held as follows: