IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 12446 of 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------
PARMABHAI VALABHAI
Versus
AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
1. Special Civil Application No. 12446 of 2002
MR VM DHOTRE for Petitioner No. 1
.......... for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date of Order: 03/05/2003
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. V.M. Dhotre on behalf
of the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the
award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in
Reference (IT) No. 124/1994 dtd. 10.04.2001 which has
been rejected by the Tribunal.
Learned advocate Mr. V.M. Dhotre has argued the
matter on merits that workman had not reissued the
tickets and even though it is presumed that he had
reissued the tickets, but in traffic case, there must
have to be excess, but there was found to be shortage or
less amount. He also submitted that the findings given
by the Tribunal is perverse, baseless and the Tribunal
has not considered the evidence led in the departmental
inquiry. He submitted that punishment of stoppage of
three increment with permanent effect having permanent
loss upto the retirement to the workman and, therefore,
looking to the misconduct, the punishment imposed by the
competent authority is harsh and unjustified. Even that
aspect has not been examined by the Tribunal. Therefore,
he submitted that the Tribunal has committed gross error.
I have considered the submissions made by learned
advocate Mr. V.M. Dhotre. The punishment which has
been imposed by the competent authority in respect to the
incident occurred on 03.09.1990, petitioner workman was
on route from Lal Darwaja to Rabari Colony. At that
occasion, his bus was checked at New Cotton Bus Stand
where ticket of Rs.1.50ps. issued between Lal Darwaja to
Rabari Colony has been reissued by the workman to the
passenger travelling from Rabari Colony to Lal Darwaja of
the same amount. The Checking staff has obtained the
statement of the passengers and concerned ticket was also
attached by the Checking staff. Now, in respect to other
thirteen passengers who were travelling from Rabari
Colony to Lal Darwaja, they were also having the same
type of reissued tickets and on that basis, the
chargesheet was served to the workman and ultimately, he
was dismissed from service on 21.12.1990 and in appeal,
the appellate authority i.e. Transport Manager has set
aside the dismissal order and reinstated the respondent
workman and imposed the punishment of stoppage of three
increments and even that has been challenged by the
workman before the Tribunal.
I have perused the entire award passed by the
Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the workman has not
challenged the legality and validity of the departmental
inquiry. The Tribunal has rightly appreciated the facts
on record on the basis of the documents which has been
produced by Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service before
the Tribunal. The reasoning given by the Tribunal in
paragraph 7 and came to the conclusion that looking to
the evidence led in the departmental inquiry, the charges
levelled against the petitioner workman is found to be
proved and also come to the conclusion that findings
recorded by the competent authority is legal and valid.
Then Tribunal has examined thequestion of punishment
that looking to the misconduct which found to be proved
against the petitioner workman where the punishment which
has been imposed by the Transport Service is justified or
not. The Industrial Tribunal has considered the past
record of the petitioner workman which is found to be bad
and looking to that Tribunal has come to the conclusion
that punishment which has been imposed by the Transport
Service is justified looking to the misconduct in
question.
I have considered the submissions of the learned
advocate Mr. V.M. Dhotre on behalf of the petitioner.
I have perused the entire award passed by the Tribunal.
According to my opinion, there is no infirmity in the
award and there is no procedural irregularity committed
by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has rightly considered the
past bad record of the petitioner workman and reissued
ticket which amounts to dishonesty and misappropriation
on the part of the petitioner workman. The post of
Conductor is a post of faith. If the Conductor commits
misconduct of dishonesty and misappropriation, recently
the view has been taken by the Apex Court that in such
cases, dismissal is the only punishment which is
considered to be proper. However, in this case,
appellate authority has already shown leniency and
reinstated the petitioner workman. Therefore, according
to my opinion, no error committed by the Tribunal which
requires any interference by this Court while exercising
the powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of
India. Hence, there is no substance in the present
petition. Present petition is dismissed.
(H. K. Rathod, J.)
#Savariya#