SBCWP No.8973/04. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8973/2004. Raj. State Road Transport Corporation Tonk Vs. General Secretary Raj.Transport Workers Union Jaipur & Anr. Date of order : November 11, 2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Ashok Bansal for the petitioner. Shri S.P. Mathur for the respondents. **** BY THE COURT :- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) Petitioner has challenged the award dated 27/12/2003 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur by which while holding the punishment of stoppage of one annual grade increment with cumulative effect imposed on the concerned workman as illegal and unjustified, the concerned workman was held entitled for all consequential benefits. 3) While relying on the judgment of this Court in the case of RSRTC Vs. Inder Singh : RLW 1988(1) 540, the Tribunal held that there is no provision of punishment of stoppage of grade increment with SBCWP No.8973/04. 2 cumulative effect under the Standing Orders. 4) Shri Ashok Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Inder Singh (supra) has already been set-aside by the Division Bench of this Court in DBSAW No.367/1998 decided on 17/2/2005. The Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment has relied on earlier judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Fateh Singh Jhajharia Vs. RSRTC (DBSAW No.282/2003 decided on 23/9/2004). The Division Bench in the above case has observed that the penalty provided is withholding of increments. Whether it is with or without cumulative effect may result in altering the nature of the penalty to the minor or major but the penalty remains withholding of increments and the penalty of withholding having been included as one of the penalties which can be imposed in case of any proven misconduct. The Division Bench has also relied on earlier judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Krishna Dutta Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan : RLR 1987 (1) 346. 5) In the present case, since the impugned award has been passed solely relying upon the judgment of this court in the case of Inder Singh (supra) and the same having been reversed by the Division Bench, in my opinion, the impugned-award cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. SBCWP No.8973/04. 3 Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned-award dated 27/12/2003 is set-aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to decide the reference afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The hearing of the case be expedited. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil