1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5307/1995 RSRTC & Anr. vs. Mahamantri Transport Works Union & Ors. Date of order : 16/7/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Ashok Kumar Bansal with Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma ) for the petitioners. Shri B.L. Gupta for the respondent. ****** Learned counsel for the petitioner has cited judgement of this Court in Divisional Manager, RSRTC, Jaipur vs. General Secretary, Transport Workers Union & Anr., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1112/1995 decided on 24.3.2009 and argued that controversy raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid writ petition. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed and the award impugned was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Labour Court with liberty to the workman as well as management to produce evidence on the question whether realisation of fine from Conductor carrying passengers should be treated as condonation of misconduct or whether a separate disciplinary enquiry could be held despite realising fine. 2 Argument of the workman is founded on the Circular issued by the petitioners on 24.7.1982. This Court in the aforesaid judgement noted that neither the workman adduced any evidence before the Labour Court to the effect that the management had the practice of condoning the misconduct of the Conductor carrying passenger without ticket once the fine was realised in the terms of the Circular dated 24.7.1982, nor management proved to the contrary that despite realisation of the fine, it used to take disciplinary action by citing the instance of that time. On that note, the award was set aside and the matter was remanded with liberty to the parties to adduce evidence and decide the same in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the respondents although sought to cite certain judgements of other High Courts and made an attempt to distinguish the above referred to judgement of this Court, but on perusal of the judgment, I hardly find any distinction between the present case and the aforesaid writ petition. For the reasons stated above, this writ 3 petition is allowed. The impugned judgement is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Labour Court with liberty to both the parties to produce evidence to show that Management at the relevant time had the practice of condoning misconduct of Conductors found carrying passengers without ticket and once the fine was realised in terms of the Circular dated 24.7.1982, no separate disciplinary action was taken against them. The management at the same time would also have the liberty to prove to the contrary. The Labour Court while deciding the matter may also take into consideration the evidence that may be recorded in past as also which may now be recorded. The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/