JUDGMENT
Gopala Gowda, J.
1. The first respondent is an ex-Conductor of petitioners Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. While he was in service, a charge-sheet was issued to him alleging that on October 18, 1984 when he was conducting the bus plying from Shahapur to Sholapur, the bus was checked and it was found that he had not issued rickets to 7 passengers nor collected fare from them. Enquiry was conducted on the basis of the said charge-sheet. The Enquiry Officer submitted report holding that the charge against the petitioner was proved. Based on such report, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order dismissing the first respondent from service. The first respondent raised a dispute. The Labour Court on the consent of the first respondent held that the enquiry conducted was fair and proper. On appreciation of the evidence on record, the Labour Court found that the order of dismissal was severe and disproportionate. Consequently, it directed the petitioners Corporation to reinstate the workman with continuity of service and 25% back-wages and other consequential benefits. Aggrieved by the same the present petition is filed by the Corporation praying to quash the award of the Labour Court.
2. It is not necessary to advert to the grounds raised and contentions advanced on behalf of the petitioners to quash the impugned award. It would be sufficient if the legality and validity of the impugned order is tested with reference to the charge.
3. The Labour Court in paragraph 10 of the impugned award has found in the Way Bill 24 passengers including 7 ticket less passengers. But tickets had been issued to 22 passengers. If that being so, actually there should have been 22 + 7 = 29 passengers in the bus. This itself indicates that the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner was not correct.
4. In paragraph 6 the Labour Court has observed that the total amount involved being Rs. 28 at the rate of Rs. 4/- per ticket for 7 passengers, the order of dismissal is severe and disproportionate in view of the decision of this Court cited therein. Having regard to the gravity of the charge, the Labour Court was justified in coming to the said conclusion.
5. The petitioner Corporation produced the history sheet as Ex. M-17 to show the involvement of the workman in 17 cases. The Labour Court rightly descarded the same on the ground that no opportunity was given to the workman to explain about those cases. The history sheet is not a relevant material for the purpose of proving the charge.
6. Having regard to the fact that the workman has not denied his involvement in 27 cases by stepping into the witness box, the Labour Court awarded only 25% back wages. There is no illegality committed by the Labour Court in passing the impugned Award. On appreciation of the entire material on record and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Labour Court has passed a just and reasonable award. The same does not call for interference by this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
7. The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is rejected.