- (1.) SINCE the issues involved in both the cases are same and even the parties are the same, both the cases were heard together and hence, both the matters are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE facts which have given rise to W. P. (S) No. 1366 of 2003 are as follows:-One B. N. P. Srivastava, respondent no. 4, while was working as Stenographer in the Divisional Office of Life Insurance corporation of India at Muzaffarpur, visited Purnea on an official work. Thereupon he claimed Rs. 85. 50paise as travelling allowance which was paid but subsequently, in course of enquiry, it could be ascertained that on the date of journey, i. e, 16. 4. 1981, not a single ticket of 1st class had been issued from Muzaffarpur to Purnea and, therefore, charge was framed putting an allegation that respondent no. 4 deliberately made a false claim of Rs. 85. 50paise as travelling allowance and thereby he acted in the manner prejudicial to good conduct and detrimental to the interest of the corporation and as such, he is liable to be punished under regulation 39 (1) (a) to (g) of the Life Insurance Corporation of india (Staff) Regulation, 1960 for violating provisions of Clauses 21, 24 and 39 of the aforesaid Regulation. Accordingly, enquiry officer was appointed to enquire into the charge framed against the respondent no. 4. The enquiry officer having found the respondent no. 4 guilty for the charges submitted its report to the disciplinary Authority, who on finding the second show cause to be unsatisfactory imposed penalty for reduction in pay by three stages in terms of Regulation 39 (1) (d) and also passed an order for recovery of Rs. 85. 50 paise.
(3.) BEING aggrieved with that order, respondent no. 4 preferred an appeal under Clause 46 of the Regulations before the Appellate authority, who affirmed the order passed by the Disciplinary authority. Thereafter memorial preferred by the appellant was also dismissed. Thereupon, respondent no. 4 raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Ministry of labour, Government of India, whereupon Central Government in exercise of power conferred under section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial disputes Act referred the dispute for its adjudication to the Central government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad and the terms of reference was as follows: "whether the action of the management of Life insurance Corporation of India, Muzaffarpur in imposing the punishment on Shri B. N. P. Srivastava, stenographer, by way of reduction by three stages in the existing time scale per month and recovery of rs. 85. 50paise from him is justified, if not, what relief is the said workman entitled to. ";