THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR. WRIT PETITION No. 15725 of 2001. ORDER Nobody appears for the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent. The petitioner questions the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, Guntur in I.D.No. 61 of 1999 dt. 26.9.2000 which has modified the punishment imposed on the 1st respondent by directing that the period of suspension be treated “as on duty” as against the said period treated “as not on duty” by the appellate authority. The facts of the case are that for ticketing irregularities, the 1st respondent was issued a charge sheet and was placed under suspension from 15.4.1996 pending enquiry. Later after obtaining the Enquiry Report dt. 26.6.1996 and after giving a notice and after getting the explanation of the petitioner, an order of removal was passed against him on 3.8.1996. Aggrieved thereof, the 1st respondent filed an appeal before the appellate authority which has interfered with the punishment of removal by substituting the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect besides treating the period of suspension “as not on duty” by the order dt. 30.8.1996. A review petition was also rejected on 26.6.1997 and thereafter the 1st respondent raised Industrial Dispute before the Labour Court, Guntur. On a consideration of the material on record including the contentions of both sides, the Tribunal was of the view that there is sufficient evidence to prove the charges and the punishment as modified by the appellate authority was proportionate except to the extent of treating the period of suspension “as not on duty”. The Tribunal therefore interfered to that extent by ordering that the said period be treated “as on duty”. In this writ petition, the Award of the Labour Court is questioned and obviously the same is to the extent of treating the period of suspension as on duty from the date of suspension i.e. 15.4.1996 to 30.8.1996. The period under which the petitioner was placed under suspension was only 4 ½ months. The Industrial Tribunal held that when the appellate authority felt that the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect is proportionate, further punishment of treating the period of suspension till reinstatement “as not on duty” was an added punishment and accordingly interfered to that extent. In view of the fact that hardly 4 ½ months period is involved in the said controversy, I am unable to interfere with the Award of the Labour Court. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J 25.11.2010. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR. WRIT PETITION No. 15725 of 2001. ORDER Dt. 25.11.2010.