Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. In our opinion, dishonesty on the proved facts cannot be inferred particularly when the correct entries were made in the collection sheet and after making the entries in it, the tickets were issued. The tickets, which were issued in the reverse order, may be because of absent mindedness. For that, a severe penalty of dismissal was not warranted. Misconduct under Clause 12(1)(b), i.e. theft, fraud or dishonesty in connection with the business or property of the undertaking, cannot be said to be made out. Similarly, misconduct under Clause 12(1)(d), i.e. willful disobedience of any lawful or reasonable order of a superior authority or any person or any other matter having an adverse effect upon the working or wages of another employee, is also not made out. Hence, when the act or omission of the petitioner was not a major misconduct, his services could not have been terminated. Now the question arises whether in the circumstances of the case, can it be said that the action of the Corporation was not bona fide ? It is the act of the petitioner, which gave rise to such an action of termination for issuing tickets in the reverse order, not one or two, but about 23 tickets at a time. This is an act of gross negligence but because of gross negligence, dishonesty cannot be inferred from this fact and as the entries were correctly made in the trip-sheet, hence, the inference of dishonesty cannot be attached to the petitioner. Therefore, the order of the Industrial Court deserves to be quashed and the case deserves to be remitted to the Industrial Court for disposing of the revision in accordance with law.

5. Ordinarily, this is the course open to us in our supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The termination is of the year 1979. The Industrial Court disposed of the revision in 1981 and this petition is pending before this court for disposal since 1981 and has seen the light of the day after almost about 7 years. Therefore, on the question of punishment of gross negligence, we would not like to send the case back to the Industrial Court. As the poor employee has been dragged in litigation for about 10 years, wisdom and justice, therefore, require that the matter is disposed of now once for all under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is intended to do justice between the parties and to save wastage of time and that the circumstances of the case and interest of justice require that the matter be decided once for all, without remitting the case to the Industrial Court, as we have already held that the action of the Corporation was not mala fide but was a bona fide one. It was the act of omission of the petitioner, which gave rise to the action. True, the issuance of 23 tickets in reverse order may not amount to a major misconduct, as enumerated in the Standard Standing Orders in Clause 12(1). As the misconduct has not been defined in the Standard Standing Orders, it would acquire special meaning in industrial law. It may mean his acts or conduct, which may be incompatible with express or implied obligations of an employee vis-a-vis the employer. There are orders of the Corporation that before a passenger boards a bus, a ticket should be issued to the said passenger and under the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sadak Parivahan Seva (Bina Tikat Yatra Ki Rok) Adhiniyam, 1974 if, an invalid ticket is issued to a passenger by a conductor, it amounts to an offence under Section 7 of the said Adhiniyam. Therefore, issuing tickets in the reverse order was not warranted by the conductor, who holds a post of confidence. Hence, forfeiture of back wages will be the sufficient punishment in the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of misconduct, though dishonesty is not inferred, yet some penalty deserves to be imposed on the petitioner, and therefore, forfeiture of back wages would be sufficient. The order of dismissal passed by the respondent Corporation, hence, deserves to be set aside and the petitioner deserves to be reinstated without back wages but with continuity of service.