SANGEETA CHANDRA,J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter to referred as "the Corporation-petitioner") challenging the award dated 20.10.2011 passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P. at Agra (herein after to referred as "the respondent No. 2") setting aside the dismissal order of the respondent No. 1 and directing his reinstatement with full back wages. Additionally, the Corporation is challenging the order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner on 13.07.2012 allowing the Application moved by the respondent No. 1 under Section 6 H(1) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after to referred as "the U.P. Act of 1947") directing the Corporation to pay Rs.7,70,036/- to the respondent No. 1 and recovery certificate dated 16.07.2012 issued by Tehsildar, Agra in consequence of such order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner.
(2.) The facts as are evident from the submissions made by learned counsel are that the respondent No. 1 was deputed on Bus No. U.P. 80-E-9297 on Agra-Jaipur route. Enroute at about 12:20 hours the Checking Squad comprising of Shri Bhushan Kumar,Traffic Superintendent, gave signal to the driver to stop the bus at Bassi Hotel. However, the respondent No. 1 did not stop the Bus and sped away. The Checking Squad submitted a report regarding the incident. On the basis of the said report a charge sheet was filed on 12.01.1995. The respondent No. 1's reply to the charge sheet was not found satisfactory and in the departmental inquiry initiated thereafter one Shri L.N Rai, officer of the State Judicial Service conducted the inquiry. Full opportunity was afforded to the respondent No. 1. The Inquiry Officer found the charges proved. On the basis of the said inquiry report a show cause notice was issued on 11.01.1996 to the respondent No. 1 as to why he may not be removed from the service. The respondent No. 1 submitted his reply which was considered by the Appointing Authority and by an order dated 07.09.2002 the respondent No. 1 was dismissed from service.
(3.) It has been contended by Shri S.K. Mishra, counsel for the Corporation, that the respondent No. 1 had departmental remedy of filing Appeal under Regulation 69 of UPSRTC (other than officers) Service Regulations 1981, Para - 1 to 5 of which are quoted as under:- "(1) An employee shall be entitled to appeal to the next higher authority from an order passed by the appointing or any other authority. (2) An employee preferring an appeal shall do so in his name. The memorandum of appeal shall contain all material statements and arguments relied upon by the appellant. (3) The appeal shall contain any intemperate language. Any appeal which contains such language may be liable to be summarily dismissed. (4) The appeal shall be addressed to the appellate, authority and submitted to the authority, against whose order it is preferred through the normal proper channel. (5) The appeal shall be preferred within three month of the date of the order. An appeal, preferred beyond three months but beyond six months of the date of the order, may be accepted by the appellate authority if sufficient cause is shown for the delay. An appeal preferred beyond time shall be dismissed summarily.";