HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.17478 of 2001 ORDER: The unsuccessful petitioner in I.D.No.251 of 1999 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam assails the Nil award dated 04.06.2001 passed therein. The petitioner entered the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) as a Conductor in the year 1990. While he was conducting the bus service on the route Razole to Pasarlapudi Lanka on 09.11.1997, a check was made and the petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings on the charge that he reissued two used tickets of Rs.2/- denomination to two passengers and misappropriated the fare collected. After due enquiry, the APSRTC removed the petitioner by order dated 28.11.1997. His appeal and review having met with failure, the petitioner filed the subject I.D. The Labour Court, upon examination of the material on record, took note of the fact that the petitioner himself had admitted his guilt in the spot explanation given to the Travelling Ticket Inspectors (TTIs). The number of passengers in the bus at the relevant point of time were only 16. However, the petitioner showed the number of passengers as 15 in the S.R. The Labour Court therefore came to the conclusion that the enquiry officer was justified in giving a finding of guilt against the petitioner. It accordingly returned the Nil award. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the punishment of removal from service was disproportionate considering the fact that the petitioner was said to have misappropriated a paltry sum of Rs.4/-. However as rightly pointed out by the Labour Court, once it was a case of misappropriation, the quantum involved was of no relevance. As has been stated by the Supreme Court time and again, in cases of this nature where an employee discharges fiduciary duties to the employer and is accountable to the employer for the monies received, any shortfall owing to misappropriation clearly indicates the abject failure on the part of the employee to live up to the standards of trust reposed in him by the employer. The doctrine of proportionality would normally have no role to play in such circumstances. The award of the Labour Court therefore does not warrant interference by this Court. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. SANJAY KUMAR, J. Date:30.11.2010 usd