Dilip Gupta, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed for setting side the award passed by the Labour Court in Adjudication Case No. 120 of 1993. The reference that had been made to the Labour Court was whether the employers were justified in terminating the services of the respondent-workman w.e.f. 21st July, 1992 and if not then to what relief the workman was entitled to.
(2.) The respondent-workman was appointed as a Conductor in the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the ''Corporation') on 3rd March, 1989. On 22nd March, 1990 the bus was checked by the Inspecting Team and it was found that the respondent-workman was carrying 58 passengers without tickets and even on being asked by the team he did not handover the way-bill. On the basis of the preliminary enquiry, the respondent-workman was suspended on 7th April, 1990 and thereafter he was served with a charge-sheet dated 16th April, 1990. The reply submitted by him was not found to be satisfactory as a result a domestic inquiry was initiated against him in which even though notices were repeatedly issued, he did not appear before the Inquiry Officer. Evidence was led on behalf of the employers and ultimately the Inquiry Officer submitted his report with the finding that the charges were fully proved. The Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings of the Inquiry Officer and a show-cause notice was served upon the respondent-workman. Thereafter the services of the workman were terminated by the order dated 21st July, 1992. The respondent-workman raised an industrial dispute. The Labour Court in its order dated 27th July 1994 observed that the domestic inquiry had not been conducted in a fair and proper manner as the evidence of the employers was not taken in the presence of the respondent-workman and nor was he given any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. The Labour Court, therefore, gave opportunity to the employers to lead evidence.
(3.) The respondent-workman in his statement before the Labour Court completely denied that any inspection of the Bus had taken place on 22nd March, 1990. He also stated that the main reason for passing the order of termination against him was that he did not pay Rs. 1,000/- to the Dealing Assistant. He also stated that on 22nd March, 1990 when he was posted as a Conductor in Bus No. UTW-9309, which was scheduled to go from Rath to Kanpur, Traffic Inspector Ranjeet Singh had checked the bus at about 11:05 A.M. between two Stations Chilli and Biwar but he did not report that any passenger was travelling without ticket. On behalf of the employers, Sri A.P. Singh Tyagi, Traffic Inspector appeared to give his statement. He stated that he along with Sri Sharda Prasad, Junior Station In-charge and Sri R.C. Sharma, Junior Foreman inspected the bus at about 11:40 A.M. between Ujnedi on Panthiya bus-stops and found that out of the 98 passengers, there were 58 passengers who were travelling without tickets and on being asked, the passengers told them that the Conductor had taken the money from them but had not issued the tickets. He, however, stated that neither the names or the statements of the passengers who were travelling without tickets were recorded. He also stated that Exhibit-8 was the copy report submitted by them and that the Conductor of the Bus refused to give the way-bill on being asked and that the First Information Report was lodged by them. He also stated that the passengers got angry when they were asked to take tickets and that subsequently the amount fetched from the tickets including the amount taken from the ticket less passengers was deposited in the Treasury.;