Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/16950/2003 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16950 of 2003
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
======================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
======================================
GUJARAT
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. - Petitioner(s)
Versus
MURJIBHAI
U. SOLANKI - Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance :
MR
MITUL K SHELAT for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR JS BRAHMBHATT for
Respondent(s) : 1,
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 21/07/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. The
petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the judgement and award
dated 31st January 2003 passed by Industrial Tribunal,
Ahmedabad in Reference I.T. No.163 of 1998.
2. The
respondent herein was serving as Conductor in the petitioner
Corporation. It was alleged that when he was on duty between Arneg
and Bavra, he permitted one lady passenger to travel from Gangad to
Bavra without issuance of ticket and when the checking inspector
sought explanation the respondent attempted to assault the checking
inspector with ticket tray. It was also alleged that he had abused
the members of the squad. Departmental inquiry was initiated which
resulted in punishment of reduction in pay scale by five steps. In
the appeal filed by the respondent the said punishment was reduced to
reduction in pay scale by four steps. The second appellate authority
reduced the punishment further by reducing the pay scale to two
stages instead of four and withholding back wages. The respondent
therefore raised industrial dispute which was numbered as Reference
I.T. No.163 of 1998. The Tribunal modified the order of the second
appellate authority by setting aside the punishment except the part
of back wages.
3. Heard
the learned Advocates for the parties at length and perused the
relevant documents on record. As a result of this exercise it is
found from the record that the alleged misconduct on the part of the
respondent was proved beyond doubt. Apart from this there were 30
past defaults against the very same respondent. It was also noticed
that when explanation was sought the respondent has even tried to
assault the authority which is a serious misconduct. Looking to the
overall facts and circumstances of the case and also the past
defaults, I am of the view that the punishment imposed upon the
second appellate authority was just and proper and the Tribunal has
clearly committed an error in setting aside the said order.
4. In
the premises aforesaid, the impugned judgement and award of the
Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad passed in Reference I.T. no.163 of
1998 is hereby quashed and set aside. The order of second appellate
authority is restored. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no
order as to costs.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.]
ar
Top