Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. Shorn of details, the facts which are essential to be stated are that the appellant - DTC filed a petition under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act before Industrial Tribunal. The charges levelled against the Respondent were that on 04.05.1989 while on duty as a Conductor on route New Delhi - Bulandshahr, he issued tickets to two passengers of less denomination of ` 2.50/- each. The said passengers had boarded the bus at Sikandrabad to go to Ghaziabad. Members of the Ticket Checking Staff of the appellant inspected the bus and found that the tickets issued to the said passengers were only in the denomination of ` 2.50/- which were valid from Sikandrabad to Dadri. The passengers told the Checking Staff that they had paid fare charges of ` 5.00/- per ticket to the Conductor whereas they were issued tickets only in the denomination of ` 2.50/-. On the basis of the report of the Checking Staff, the Manager of the concerned Depot i.e. BBM Depot, issued charge-sheet dated 15.05.1989 to the Respondent for causing financial loss to the employer and for committing irregularity and „misconduct‟ within the meaning of Executive Instructions regarding the duties of a Conductor and the Standing Orders governing the conduct of DTC employees. In an enquiry conducted, the Enquiry Officer found the charges proved. The Manager, BBM Depot acting as a Disciplinary Authority issued a show cause notice on 25.07.1989 to the Respondent with proposed punishment of removal from service. The Disciplinary Authority passed the order to confirm punishment of removal from service of the Respondent on 29.05.1990 and remitted one month‟s salary by way of Money Order and an appropriate petition under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act was also filed before the Industrial Tribunal.

3. Record reveals that on 06.03.1991, a preliminary issue was framed which reads as under :

"Whether the applicant held a legal and valid enquiry against the respondent according to principles of natural justice? "

4. After hearing the arguments, the Tribunal on 29.03.2001 decided the said issue against the Appellant as the report of the Enquiry Officer was found perverse, inasmuch as the Enquiry Officer admitted that letter Ex.RW-1/2 received from one of the defaulting passengers was not taken into consideration while submitting his findings. The said communication revealed that the said passenger had asked the Conductor to issue a ticket only till Dadri and the Checking Team was informed that he could not get off at his destination as he had slept over.

13. In the instant case, the Appellant did not produce cogent legal evidence to establish „misconduct‟ on the part of the Respondent. The crucial testimony was that of two passengers Ranvir Singh and Anil Kumar to whom allegedly tickets of less denomination were issued. However, none of them was examined during enquiry. Contrary to that Ranvir Singh sent communication dated 19.06.1989 (Ex.RW1/2) to the Appellant in which he exonerated the Respondent and took the blame on himself for getting ticket for Dadri for a sum of ` 2.50/- only. This communication was not taken into consideration by the Enquiry Officer before arriving at his conclusion about „misconduct‟. It appears that the Checking Staff considered the statements of the defaulting passengers as gospel truth and believed their version without independent corroboration. There was every possibility of the passengers to have obtained tickets for that particular amount and to save their own skin and to avoid penalty for getting tickets of less denomination to have accused the Respondent. It is unbelievable that the passengers would pay complete fare of ` 5.00/- and would not insist for the ticket for the destination for which the payment was made in full. The defaulting passengers were not fined for performing journey beyond the destination for which tickets in their possession permitted. During the process of checking, the cash collected by the Respondent was not checked to tally it with the tickets issued.