Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4940/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4940 of 2010
=========================================================
PRADIPSINH
KIRITSINH CHUDASAMA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DIVISIONAL
CONTROLLER - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
MUKESH H RATHOD for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date : 14/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. RULE.
Mr. Raval, learned counsel waives service of rule on behalf of the
respondent. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up
for hearing today.
2. By
way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set
aside the impugned award dated 14.05.2009 passed by the Labour Court,
Rajkot in Reference [LCR] No. 85/2008, whereby the Labour Court has
rejected the said reference.
3. The
short facts of the case are that the petitioner at the relevant time
was working as Conductor with the respondent Corporation. The
allegation against the petitioner is that on 03.02.2006 while he was
discharging his duties, the bus was checked by the checking squad and
it was found that he has committed certain financial irregularities.
In view of the aforesaid misconduct, the petitioner was served with
the charge sheet being Charge Sheet no.189/2006 dated 16.05.2006.
Thereafter, departmental inquiry was initiated against him and
ultimately, show cause notice dated 03.02.2007 was issued to the
petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed from
the service. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice
vide reply dated 10.02.2007. After considering the case of the
petitioner, as well as the documents of the departmental inquiry, the
guilt of the petitioner was proved and the respondent vide order
dated 14.03.2007 dismissed the petitioner from service. Against the
said order, the petitioner preferred First Appeal before the
appellate authority, which came to be rejected vide order dated
28.04.2008.
3.1. In
view of that the petitioner raised industrial dispute which was
ultimately referred to the Labour Court, Rajkot for adjudication
being Reference [LCR] No. 85/2008. Before the Labour Court, both the
parties adduced parties evidence and after appreciating the material
produced before it, the Labour Court rejected the said reference.
Hence, this petition.
4. Heard
learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents
on record. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, and in view of the allegations levelled against the
petitioner, I am of the opinion, that ends of justice will be
served, if the petitioner is reinstated in service on his original
basic pay-scale.
5. Under
the circumstances, the petition is partly allowed. The impugned
award dated 14.05.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot in
Reference [LCR] No. 85 of 2008 is quashed and set aside. The
respondent will reinstate the petitioner in service on his original
pay scale. The respondent will reinstate the petitioner within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order of this
Court. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as
to costs.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.]
/phalguni/
Top