Rx' THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAL0r+:_%§;-«._' ~ _ Dated this the 24" day offlctnber, zaos; 1' ' " r.- Before mg I10N'B£.E MR JUSHCE ,r;1;:i;m»:;w1TL' .1i4MES;;: _ ; T 7 WritPe1i1iou 3945332 3 Sri R Veera Recidy, Ex Conduaétoi' _ 7 IC 111/3,BeilaryIDcpot KSRTC,BeHaryDivisio11,Be:],3;y...,.:"' ' Petitioner (By Sn" N 3 saa;go1:§;;4;;7v;.}V " And: Managerncgnt cf N"E.1<LRTC',A1.Bc1l31'y.AI3ivisien By its I)iV'ision3i'Coxfi*:'a1i-c:f,'B¢Ha1y"'* .. ' ' By the Chief Law 'NEKB EEC. .-~ Gulbarga Divis%:)4_x1,VVf,';'uIt'i::rgie; = V Respondent _ (By S;i_;KzisemuHa Ads}-.) A " is filed under Art.226f22? of the Constitution to thé'm'der ef the Labour Court, Hubli in ID 103f20fl3 dated 21.4.20-34 --a:n:a§;u:ré'=.: A coming on for Orders this day, the Court made 1316 ' ' I ' " -- __f(&il-pwing: - " ORDER
The order of dismissal for nan-prosecution dated 7.9.2007 is
V ‘ » fmglied. W
Petition is against the order cf the Industrial Tribunal, ~ V.
10322903. Petitioneriwcrkrnan has been dismissed v.jf*e¢’ic’.,»fw;”‘ A”
homing an enquiry by the responciemt. Wlxiie petitioizer
himscif as .3 Conductor of the bus bearing No. Aifiiion
Siraguppa « Ravihai, the same was mspeafiéaiby the Checking ‘afid it ” A
was found that out of 15 passengcrc, 8 nott is’s;:M~.dfi:ickets i.e.,
nciflzcr the Cnnductor had tgiclicts amount. The
Checking Inspector iiciictlcss passengers
and aiso cbtaincd’ gszéaiiigiétitsoner and madc an
endorsemcr;t–cn,$;1ié has acknewledged. The
the enq ‘ _, aficr verifying the
Articles of iictitioner is guilty of misconduct and
ciialicxigciiibefcre ihe Tribunai an reference, the Tribunal has
hcld held is fair and property as also regarding the quantum
cf §_maga1g:n§.igr i.e., the dismissal order passed by the Disciplinary
_Aufl;io’ti.ty :g~p;x§g;o;1iona:e and, accordingly, Iiismissed the dispute of the:
K ‘ ” – fizgtionerj – iicncc, this petition,
the cotmaelreprescntingthepame’ s.
The contention cf the petitioner is, petitioner had put in mere than
twenty yam of service, he has got wife and children to be looked afier. He
(3%/My
sufiers fiom haréship and izreparahle 1033 would be caused to hém
of dismissal is no: revemcd and am: the pmushmemj T» is’
disproportionate as against the aliegatien made é géit13.t . n£)i
collected the fare from the passengers. It wasbam; and he”
the pmcess of issuing the tickets the ‘%w;ifs. ébndi:cted. ”
Accordingly, he has prayed fer allowing the
Counsel for the. gcspogzflfiifi. at ease of total
dishonesty. misconduct and the
petitioner does 1 apt’; Further meme, in similar
<:i1'cLIxnsta.zt.c:V:v<;-:.st, in; case of Regiomzl Manage,
Rajastkan Rfiad Vs Saba: Lat _. 2994 III LLJ
I678, fgpmstd Bf the workmen for dishonesty to," be
S circumstatwes, I do not find any merit in
V
' .._1$eu:i;m i_m;e,ordingty, dismissed
saf-
%fi ? Tudqe