- (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-RSRTC against the award dt. 13.12.1989 passed by Labour Court, Jaipur whereby the Labour Court substituted the penalty of removal by that of stoppage of five annual grade increments without cumulative effect and also awarded 50% back wages to the respondent-workman.
(2.) An industrial dispute was referred by the appropriate Government to the Labour Court on the question whether removal of the respondent-workman by the writ petitioner-Corporation from their services was valid and if not, what relief the workman was entitled to? Respondent was appointed on temporary basis by the petitioner on 24.03.1979 and he was made regular on 11.12.1979. He was placed under suspension vide order dt. 27.12.1979 in contemplation of enquiry and charge-sheet was served upon him on 05.01.1980. He submitted reply to the charge sheet on 22.01.1980. Petitioners removed the respondent from their services vide order dt. 29.07.1980. This writ petition was earlier allowed vide judgment of this Court dt. 20.09.1995. Respondent-workman however filed appeal challenging the aforesaid judgment in special appeal before the Division Bench. The Division Bench allowed the appeal setting aside the award of the Labour Court on the ground that writ petition was decided in the absence of counsel for respondent and even without supplying him copy of the writ petition and remanded the matter back to the Single Bench. This is how, the present writ petition has been heard again for final disposal.
(3.) Shri Mukesh Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner-Corporation submitted that the learned Labour Court erred in law in substituting the penalty of removal by that of stoppage of five annul grade increments without cumulative effect. Penalty of removal was wholly justified in view of the fact that respondent was found carrying 11 passengers without ticket. Respondent was working with the petitioner as Conductor and there was fiducial relationship of master and servant between them. Out of 11 passengers, respondent collected fare from 5 passengers but did not issue any ticket to them. Learned Counsel submitted that Supreme Court in number of judgments has held that in such like cases, penalty of dismissal was warranted. When the Labour Court has held the charges as proved, there was no justification for it to substitute the penalty of removal and also awarding 50% back wages. Shri Mukesh Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of the Court to the additional affidavit filed on 30.04.2008 showing that even after reinstatement, respondent-workman was found carrying 1 passenger without ticket on 30.11.1997, two passengers without ticket on 07.08.1998 and again two passengers without ticket on 08.02.2007. Apart from this, there was one complaint against him for 04.02.2004 for loss of ticket book and for short of income. It was argued that in two of these cases wherein he was found carrying passengers without ticket, he was once awarded penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect and another time penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect with fine of Rs. 500/-. Fine was imposed on him on earlier two occasions too for earning less income. Learned Counsel relied on Division Bench judgment of this Court in R.S.R.T.C. and Anr. v. Shanker al and Anr. DBSAW No. 872/2007 decided on 23.11.2007 rendered at Principal Seat of this Court and argued that in the said case, Division Bench taking note of similar allegations against Conductor who had been reinstated pursuant to the award of the Labour Court on 05.01.1996 and who was thereafter again found to be carrying passengers without ticket on as many as three occasions, held that no interference in the quantum of penalty was called for by this Court.;