IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3471 of 2010(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABY JOSEPH, STATION MASTER, KSRTC PALA DEPOT, (FORMERLY CONDUCTOR, KSRTC DEPORT, KOTTAYAM). BY ADV. SRI.ANANDARAJAN.N RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE), KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY) 3. THE KSRTC APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SC SRI.V.V.N.NAMBIAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).3471/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. While the petitioner was working as conductor in the KSRTC, Kottayam Depot, he was in charge of Bus No.RT 205 , operating on the route Kottayam-Thenkasi. On 24.10.2006, after operating the trip from Thenkasi to Kottayam, while the bus was in the depot, the petitioner got down from the bus and went to the ticket counter for interim remittance of the collection amount. This was allegedly at about 21 hours of 24.10.2006 and according to him, when he returned to the bus, he found his stay box, which was kept on the luggage carrier above the conductor's seat, missing. It is stated that in the process, he lost the manual ticket rack with pre-priced paper tickets, Electronic Ticketing Machine charger and his personal belongings. The matter was reported to the authorities. Petitioner was placed under suspension pending disciplinary action. Finally as per Ext.P6 order, Rs.61545.50, being the value of the lost tickets, was ordered to be recovered from him. The W.P.(C).3471/10 2 appeal filed was rejected by Ext.P11 order. Petitioner carried the matter to the Appellate Tribunal by filing a Revision Petition. Revision was disposed of by Ext.P12 order directing that recovery be confined to Rs.10,000/-. It is thereupon the writ petition is filed challenging the aforesaid proceedings. 2. The main argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Rule 73 of the 'Manual of rules and instructions for the guidance of the Operating staff', the recovery now ordered is impermissible. Rule 73 of the Manual reads hereunder. Loss of tickets – Conductors shall take the utmost care to prevent loss of tickets. If however, a conductor loses his tickets he shall be punishable with a fine in the first instance which shall not exceed Rs.5 depending on the circumstances and nature of the loss. For a second similar offence he shall be suspended for three months and if the offence is repeated for a third time he shall be dismissed. W.P.(C).3471/10 3 3. A reading of this Rule shows that what is provided in the Rule is not recovery of loss, but only regarding the punishment. On the other hand the impugned proceedings show that what is ordered to be recovered from the petitioner is the loss caused to the Corporation. Rule 73, in my view, is of no relevance. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the aforesaid contentions raised by the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs