IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 14379 of 1989. Date of Decision : January 22, 2009. Surinder Singh ...... Petitioner. Versus The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bathinda, ...... Respondents. and another. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present: Mr. A.S. Klar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Khosla, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). In the present case, the challenge is to the award dated 15.12.1988 (Annexure-P-4), vide which the reference has been answered against the workman-petitioner herein, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bathinda. The petitioner-workman is a bus conductor who was in employment of the respondent No. 2 since 01.01.1984. He challenges the termination of his services by the employer w.e.f. 20.09.1984. A checking of the bus was held on 19.09.1984, in which it was found that the petitioner-workman had resold the tickets which has been exhibited as Ex.M/2 and Ex.M/5. The voucher Ex. M/6 which the conductor had prepared on that date showed that he had sold these tickets. An explanation to the report submitted by Surjit Singh, Inspector, was called for from the workman which is Ex. M/13. On the basis of admission of guilt and C.W.P. No. 14379 of 1989. apology which is in the hand writing of the workman, the services of the workman was terminated. Handwriting expert has been produced in the Court who has proved that the handwriting is of workman and therefore, the confessional statement was his. In view of the admission of guilt by the workman which is placed on record as Ex. M/8, there is not much which requires to be adjudicated in the present case. Further one more aspect which needs to be pointed out is that the workman had worked for just nine months with the respondent-management. In view of the categoric finding which has been recorded by the Labour Court and in view of the fact that no illegality in the said order could be found or projected during the course of arguments which would call for interference by this Court, leaving no option but to dismiss the present writ petition. Ordered accordingly. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE January 22,2009. sjks. -2-