IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 310 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 21/11/2007 in WP NO : 7232 OF 1999 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The APSRTC, Rep by its Depot Manager, Falaknuma Depot, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Chandra Vihar, Hyderabad. 2 Sri Mohammed Ahmed, S/o. Mohd. Osman, C/o. Syed Dastagiri, H.No. 16-6-427/1, Osmanpura, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.KAMBHAM MADHAVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by the judgment delivered by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.2732 of 1999, dated 21-11-2007, this appeal has been filed by the employer. Respondent No.2 a Bus Conductor was removed from service because of some irregularities committed by him. Being aggrieved by the order of removal, the respondent-Conductor had initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’). The Labour Court, by an award dated 9-2-1998 in I.D.No. 87 of 1996, set aside the order of removal by holding that there was no misconduct or any irregularity committed by the respondent- Conductor and accordingly awarded backwages. Being aggrieved by the award, the appellant-employer has filed the aforestated petition. The learned single Judge has agreed with the findings arrived at by the Labour Court. We have heard the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant. Looking to the fact that the Labour Court has found the respondent-Conductor to be absolutely innocent and as he was reinstated with backwages, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the learned single Judge, more particularly when it has been found that the passengers from whom fare has been collected were not knowing Telugu or Urdu and even the respondent-Conductor was not in a position to understand the language. Moreover, somebody had consumed alcoholic drink and because of that some further problem had been created. Moreover the check had been effected even before completion of one fare stage. For the aforestated reasons, we are in agreement with the conclusions arrived at by the learned single Judge. The appeal is therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 25th March, 2008 GRR To 1. 2.2 CD copies