IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7511 of 2008 Between: K.Eswaraiah S/o.K.Narayanappa R/o.D.No.2/151 S.C old Colony, Atmakur Post &(M) Anantapur Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Depot Manager A.P.S.R.T.C Anantapur Depot Anantapur 2 The Industrial Cum-Labour Court Anantapur Rep.by its Chairman Cum Presiding Officer .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue appropriate writ or order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari after calling for the records relating to the award in I.D No.297/2000 dt.18-12-2002 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Corut Anantapur which was published on the notice board of the Labour Employment Training and factories(Lab-I Department) vide G.O.R.t No.377 dt.24-2-2003 and quash the award and consequently direct the 1st respondent to reinestate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and with all consequential benefits in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.PRATAP REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7511 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Conductor in the Anantapur Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. While he was conducting a bus on 27.10.1996 on the route from Singanamala to Anantapur, in the early hours of the day, a check took place between Stage Nos.7 and 6 at about 5:45 a.m. It was found that the petitioner did not collect fare and issue tickets to as many as 58 passengers, who have boarded at stage No.7. It was also noticed that the statistical report was not closed at stage No.7. A charge sheet, in relation to these omissions and commissions, was issued to the petitioner. He submitted an explanation and the 1st respondent directed a domestic enquiry into the matter. The enquiry officer held the petitioner guilty of the charges leveled against him. Through an order, dated 03.05.1997, the 1st respondent directed removal of the petitioner. The departmental remedies of appeal and review did not yield any result. Therefore, the petitioner approached the Labour Court, Anantapur by filing I.D.No.297 of 2000 under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court passed an award, dated 18.12.2002, refusing to grant any relief to the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. Sri Ashok Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was suffering from conjunctivitis to the eyes and since a large number of passengers boarded at stage No.7, both inside and top of the bus, he could not complete the process of issuing tickets. He contends that even before the petitioner could complete the issuing of tickets, check took place. Learned counsel points out that in the check memo, it was alleged that the petitioner failed to collect fare and issue tickets to 10 passengers, whereas in the charge sheet, allegation in respect of 48 more passengers was included. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has resorted to the worst possible misconduct, inasmuch as almost a bus load of passengers were permitted to travel, without collecting fare. He submits that the bus was treated as a free transport facility, and the employees with such negligence and indifference cannot be continued in service. It is true that immediately after the check took place, a charge memo was issued, pointing out the omissions on the part of the petitioner, in collecting fare and issuing tickets to 10 passengers, apart from alleging that he failed to follow the rule of ‘issue and start’. However, once a detailed charge sheet was issued and full- fledged departmental enquiry was conducted into the allegation, as to the failure of the petitioner to collect fare and issue tickets to 58 passengers, no procedural defect can be said to have taken place. Further, if there was any discrepancy, as to the number of passengers, who were found travelling without tickets, the petitioner could certainly have demonstrated the same in the departmental proceedings. On a close scrutiny of the evidence on record, the enquiry officer found that the charge against the petitioner is proved. The Labour Court did not notice any defect in the domestic enquiry. It is not an ordinary case, where one or two passengers were found traveling in the bus without tickets or where it can be said that in spite of his due diligence, the conductor could not issue tickets to a negligible number of passengers. The passengers, up to almost the full capacity of the bus, were found traveling without tickets. In addition to that, the petitioner did not choose to close the statistical report, even after the ticket issue point i.e., stage No.7, had crossed. For all practical purposes, the presence of the petitioner in the bus was nominal and the passengers availed the service, free of any charges. The resultant loss to the Corporation can easily be imagined. The anonymous letter received in the Depot, to the effect that the conductors of the buses in the early hours on the concerned route were in the habit of collecting fares from the labourers, who board the bus and not issuing tickets, cannot be said to be bereft of context. Even if the petitioner did not have any intention of misappropriating the fare collected from the passengers, his failure to collect fare from such a large number of passengers, is a sufficient ground to remove him from service. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the Labour Court. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 08.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7511 of 2008 Date: 08.04.2008 JSU