HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.3345 OF 2002 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with I.D.No.251 of 2000 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, and to quash the award dated 23.8.2001 passed therein by holding it as illegal and arbitrary, and to direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with back wages and all other attendant benefits. 2. Heard Sri B.G. Ravindra Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Vasudeva Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-corporation. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a conductor on 31.12.1985 and while he was discharging duties, on 8.7.1998, the checking officials of the respondent-Corporation conducted a check and alleged that the petitioner had indulged in cash and ticket irregularities. On the report of the checking officials, the respondent-Corporation construed the irregularity alleged to have been committed by the petitioner as misconduct and issued charge memo on 1.8.1998, for which the petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges levelled against him. Being not satisfied with the said explanation, the departmental AKS,J W.P.No.3345/2002 2 enquiry was initiated against the petitioner. After conducting an enquiry, on the basis of the report of the enquiry officer, the respondent-corporation removed the petitioner from service vide order dated 5.12.1998. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed I.D.No.251 of 2000 before the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal without appreciating all the contentions raised by the petitioner dismissed the I.D. vide order dated 23.8.2001. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that a couple boarded the bus at Medchal, and as the wife sat on the ladies seat the husband sat in the back row of the bus, by mistake both of them purchased two tickets each, and that the wife on reaching stage No.13, informed the petitioner that her husband had already purchased the tickets, and she requested for return of the amount of her tickets, for which the petitioner did not agree and the said couple had protested and then, the petitioner returned the fare amount of extra tickets and took back the tickets, and that the said fact was not taken into account either by the enquiry officer or by the disciplinary authority. He further contended that the disciplinary authority without considering all the aspects imposed major penalty of removal from service vide order dated 5.12.1998, and that the Tribunal ought to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act and considered the case AKS,J W.P.No.3345/2002 3 of the petitioner by applying the proportionality theory and atleast, it ought to have set aside the order of removal, but the learned Tribunal dismissed the I.D. without granting any relief to the petitioner. 5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent- Corporation contended that the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of removal only for the proven misconduct in the enquiry and that no illegality has been committed by the disciplinary authority in passing removal order and that the learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the I.D. and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. This Court has considered the rival submissions made by the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that this Court can interfere, when in exercise of jurisdiction conferred by, the Tribunal has acted illegally or improperly without giving an opportunity to be heard to the affected party or where the procedure adopted in dealing with the dispute is opposed to principles of natural justice. The findings of fact reached by the Tribunal as a result of the appreciation of evidence cannot be reopened and reversed in writ proceedings. Until and unless some grave irregularity and illegality is apparent on the face of the record or until and unless such irregularity has been pointed out, the AKS,J W.P.No.3345/2002 4 Courts cannot interfere with award of the Tribunal. In the instant case, no illegality or irregularity has been pointed out by the petitioner in the award passed by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the award impugned. However, considering the circumstances of the case and the length of service rendered by the petitioner, this Court feels that ends of justice would be met if the service benefits of the petitioner from 31.12.1985 till date of removal i.e., 5.12.1998, are ordered to be paid to the petitioner, if not already paid. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent-Corporation to pay the service benefits of the petitioner for the service rendered by him from 31.12.1985 to 5.12.1998, if not already paid. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Dated: 20th September, 2018. Nn. AKS,J W.P.No.3345/2002 5 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.3345 OF 2002 20/09/2018 Nn.