Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(16) He next submitted that the major penalty imposed to the petitioner for removal from service is not commensurated to the allegation levelled against the petitioner as there was no fault on the part of the petitioner. He was insisting the students to purchase the tickets and in the meantime, the checking squad inspected the bus and found three students without ticket.

(17) He next submitted that the department is fully aware about the fact that the students on the route in question from Faizabad to Gonda of Nandani Nagar Mahavidyalaya are in habit of not purchasing the tickets and on being insisted to purchase the tickets, the drivers and conductors of the buses are being misbehaved and beaten apart from damaging the buses due to which no buses were operating on the route for long time, therefore, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that order of removal passed by awarding major penalty to the petitioner is not justifiable in law.

(20) During the course of submission, learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention of this Court on the statement of fact made in paragraph 21 of the writ petition, wherein he has placed reliance upon a circular dated 28.2.1996, which empowers the employees of the corporation in the event of being without ticket, the names, addresses and statements of the passengers who are found to be without ticket be necessarily recorded, but in the case of the petitioner, no names, addresses and statements of the passengers who were found to be without ticket have been recorded. The reply to the statement of fact made in the aforesaid paragraph has been given in paragraph 23 of the counter affidavit, wherein the same has not been denied.

(30) On perusal of the above referred judgment, similar is the matter of the petitioner also. Here in the present case, the students who were found to be without ticket were not examined by the Enquiry Officer nor by the disciplinary authority. Merely on the basis of the report of the Traffic Superintendent major penalty against the petitioner has been awarded.

(31) The judgment relied upon by Sri Anuj Kudesia, learned Advocate is in regard to the fact that wherein one passenger was found to be without ticket and upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it was found that full fledged procedure was adopted while conducting the enquiry and thereafter, the Supreme Court has held that for the quantum of punishment and establishing charges to be proved against an employee, no interference should be made by the courts. The relevant paragraph of the judgments relied upon by Sri Anuj Kudesia, learned Advocate are being quoted below:-

(32) On perusal of the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents, there was no case that the circular issued by the department was not considered while concluding the disciplinary proceeding against the employee. Here in the present case, it has been admitted by the respondents that the circular issued by the department was not followed and the students who were found to be without ticket were examined in the disciplinary proceedings. Once the very basis of the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner was not examined in a proper manner, by taking statement of the students who were found to be without ticket, the charge against the petitioner would not have been established.