- (1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. Heard Shri Rahul Anand Gaur, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of U. P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) the petitioner and Shri D. N. Dubey, learned standing Counsel appearing for contesting respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE writ petition is directed against the award of the Labour Court dated 16-7-1988 holding that punishment of dismissal of the workman (Shri Laxmi Kant Dwivedi) from the post of Conductor on the charges of carrying passengers without ticket is harsh and disproportionate and thereby setting it aside, it has granted relief of back wages to the extent of 1/4th of the salary to the workmen. The brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are that the workman, late Laxmi Kant Dwivedi, was appointed as Ticket Conductor at Mahoba Depot of Corporation in October 1990. While he was discharging his duty at bus No. U. P. 93/2349 running between Kanpur and Khajuraho, the aforesaid bus was checked by Senior Station Incharge, in which 24 passengers out of 50 passengers were found travelling without ticket. His explanation was sought for and thereafter departmental enquiry was conducted whereupon the charges were found proved and by order dated 30-6- 1994 he was dismissed from service. The workman raised an industrial dispute, which was referred for adjudication to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kanpur registered as Adjudication Case No. 297 of 1996. The workman concerned sought to assail order of punishment on the ground that no passenger was found without ticket, enquiry was conducted ex-parte, an outsider was appointed as Enquiry Officer and he was not afforded any opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. When the proceedings were pending before the Labour Court, the workman died and substituted by respondent No. 1 being his legal heir. The Labour Court after hearing all the parties held that the charge levelled against the workman that he was carrying 24 passengers without ticket is proved. He discarded the defence that the allegations were levelled against the workman for extraneous consideration, and, has recorded a finding of fact that the charge stands proved. Thereafter, he proceeded to consider the question of punishment and considering the fact that the workman died leaving behind his widow having two minor children who are facing starvation on account of non-availability of any source of earning livelihood, set aside the punishment of 'dismissal' and has directed the appellant to pay arrears of salary to the widow from the date of the order of the dismissal to the extent of 1/4th of the arrears of salary.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the employer, Corporation vehemently contended that once the charge of serious misconduct of carrying passengers without ticket was found proved the Labour Court erred in law and committed manifest error apparent of the face of record by interfering with the quantum of punishment. On the contrary learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 contended that enquiry was not conducted fairly, the workman was not afforded opportunity, there was no material to show that passengers were travelling without ticket and the entire finding is perverse. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.;