Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/21344/2007 2/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 21344 of 2007
For
Approval and Signature:
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 ?
=========================================================
G.S.R.T.C.
- Petitioner(s)
Versus
MANIBHAI
MOTIBHAI ZHALA C/O. ADV. RAJIV K. DESAI - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
AVANI S MEHTA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR KISHOR M PAUL for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 27/08/2010
ORAL JUDGMENT
By
way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and
order dated 24.1.2007 passed by the Labour Court, Nadiad in Reference
(LCN) No.472 of 2000 whereby the Labour Court has granted
reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service and 40%
backwages.
2. The
respondent was working as a Conductor with the
petitioner-Corporation. On 20.2.1992, a chargesheet was issued
against him stating that when he was on duty on the route from Karjan
to Khambhat, he had collected money from the passengers but not
issued tickets to them; he gave unpunched ticket to one passenger by
collecting money from him so that it can be reused; he did not
collect money nor give the ticket of two passengers and when the
cash was checked, it was found less. On completion of inquiry, the
respondent was dismissed from service vide order dated 20.2.1995.
Against the aforesaid order, the respondent filed first appeal and
second appeal and as nothing was heard from the Department he
ultimately, filed the Reference before the Labour Court. By judgment
and order date 24.1.2007, the reference was partly allowed and the
order of dismissal was set aside and the petitioner was ordered to
reinstate the respondent on his original post with continuity of
service and 40% backwages. However, the punishment was imposed of
stoppage of two increments with permanent effect. Hence, this
petition.
3. I
have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record
and have also gone through the impugned judgment and order of the
Labour Court.
4. Keeping
in mind the previous record of 11 defaults, the Tribunal has
substituted the penalty of dismissal by imposing the punishment of
stoppage of two increments with permanent effect and has reinstated
the workman by cancelling the penalty of dismissal. I am in complete
agreement with the said order of the Labour Court. However, looking
to the fact that no reasons are assigned, the order granting 40% of
backwages is required to be quashed and set aside.
5. In
the result, the petition is partly allowed. The impugned order of the
Labour Court, Nadiad in so far as it grants backwages to the
respondent is quashed and set aside.
The
respondent shall be reinstated in service from 1st October
2010 and benefits of the award shall be given within seven months
from today.
Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent only.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.)
zgs/-
Top