V. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Mahaboobnagar v. The Depot Manager, Apsrtc And Another

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.23592 OF 2008 ORDER:

1.

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with I.D.No.4 of 2007 on the file of the 2nd respondent-Labour Court -III, Hyderabad, and to quash the award dated 21.4.2008 passed therein, by holding it as illegal and arbitrary, and to direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service, attendant benefits with full back wages including all consequential service benefits. 2.

Heard Sri P. Venkateswar Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. Mayur Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent-Corporation.

3.

It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as conductor on 17.4.1992 and while he was discharging his duties on 14.7.2005, the checking officials of the respondentCorporation conducted check and alleged that he indulged in cash and ticket irregularities. On the said allegations, the respondent-Corporation initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, and after conducting enquiry, imposed punishment of removal from service on the petitioner on 28.1.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed I.D.No.4

of 2007 before the Labour Court. But the Labour Court dismissed the I.D. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.

4.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that except the incident in question, there are no such other incidents in the entire service career of the petitioner and that the punishment of removal is very disproportionate and that the Labour Court ought to have applied proportionality theory and interfered with the punishment of removal, but the Labour Court has erroneously dismissed the I.D.

5.

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondentCorporation contended that the disciplinary authority imposed punishment of removal for the proven misconduct and the Labour Court has rightly dismissed the I.D., and therefore, the award impugned does not warrant any interference. 6.

This Court having considered the submissions made by the parties and the nature of the charges levelled against the petitioner, is of the considered view that the punishment of removal imposed by the respondent-Corporation is very disproportionate, and the Labour Court ought to have examined the case of the petitioner and interfered with the punishment of removal by applying the proportionality theory, and at least, the Labour Court ought to have directed the respondent-

Corporation to reinstate the petitioner into service as fresh conductor. Since the punishment of removal is shockingly disproportionate, this Court feels that ends of justice would be met, if the respondent-Corporation is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service as fresh conductor.

7.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Corporation to reinstate the petitioner into service as fresh conductor, subject to medical fitness, without continuity of service, without back wages and other attendant benefits. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Dated:8th October, 2018.

Nn.

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.23592 OF 2008 8/10/2018 Nn.