- (1.) Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 29.8.2000 (Annexure P-4) and subsequently award dated 27.3.2003 (Annexure P-5). As per case set out by the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the workman") in the writ petition, the workman was appointed as Conductor on 3.6.1971. On 14.12.1999 when he was on duty on Bus No. 4253 on Chandigarh-Gurgaon route, the said bus was inspected/checked by the Checking Staff and it was detected that the tickets issued by him to certain passengers were old one, already punched from both sides, in this way, he was found to have embezzled Government money to the tune of Rs. 424/-. It was found that the workman in any case had charged more amount than the amount for which tickets were allegedly issued to passengers. He was accordingly placed under suspension whereafter charge-sheet was served upon him. Vide order 29.6.1994 his services were terminated by the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as "the management"). The statutory appeal and also the second appeal were also dismissed. Petitioner-workman raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court by the Government for adjudication. A claim statement was filed by him before the Labour Court alleging that the enquiry against him had not been conducted in a fair and proper manner. Upon notice thereof, respondent-management filed its reply. Replication too was filed by the petitioner-workman to the written statement. The learned Labour Court vide order dated 29.8.2000, Annexure P-4, did not agree with the plea of the petitioner-workman and held that the enquiry so conducted was fair and proper. Thereafter, the learned Labour Court proceeded with to examine the termination order and finally, vide its award dated 27.3.2003, holding the termination to be valid, dismissed the claim of the petitioner-workman and answered the reference against him. Hence, the present writ petition by petitioner-workman.
(2.) Upon notice of motion the written statement has been filed by respondent-management, inter-alia, stating that the enquiry so conducted against the petitioner-workman is based upon facts and evidence adduced on record. It has been stated that due opportunity of being heard had been afforded to the petitioner-workman. The order of the termination is, thus, legal.
(3.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.;