- (1.) THE instant writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned award of the Labour Court dated May 22, 1989, by which the claim of the respondent-workman had been allowed after holding that the termination of his services, vide order, dated August 8, 1984, was invalid, and the Labour Court directed the reinstatement of the workman along with back wages and all other consequential benefits.
(2.) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that respondent-workman had been appointed on daily wages on probation of two years as a conductor vide Order No. 898 dated March 22, 1983 by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short the Corporation ). On January 25, 1984, the vehicle on which the workman had been working as conductor, was checked on Ganganagar-Gharsana route and out of 49-1/2 passengers, twelve passengers were found travelling without tickets. On further investigation, it was revealed that the workman had realised the fare from two passengers but did not issue tickets to them; while the remaining ten passengers had neither been issued ticket nor fare had been charged from them. The Corporation issued show-case notice to the workman, dated July 25, 1984, to which the respondent-workman replied and after considering the same, his services stood terminated vide order dated April 8, 1984, by paying him a sum of Rs. 720 in lieu of the notice on the ground that his work was not found satisfactory during the probation period. The said order was challenged by the workman and the "appropriate Government" made a reference vide order, dated June 30, 1986; the Labour Court, after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the termination of services of the workman had been without conducting any inquiry and in spite of the fact that it was a termination of probation simpliciter, it tantamounts to retrenchment and being in violation of provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the Act), it was invalid and, therefore, the workman was entitled for reinstatement with back wages and all consequential benefits. Hence this writ petition.
(3.) IT has been pointed out that during pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court, the Corporation adduced sufficient evidence before the Labour Court to justify the termination of the workman and Sri Bhati, learned counsel for the petitioner-Corporation, has drawn the attention of the Court to the deposition of Sri Bishan Singh, Traffic Inspector, who was involved in the checking, and he had categorically deposed before the Labour Court that out of twelve passengers found travelling without tickets, two passengers had paid the fare to the workman but the workman had not issued them the tickets. He was cross-examined by the defence nominee Sri Jaiveer Singh but nothing could be extracted which may hamper the veracity of his statement, made by the said witness.;