HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.5747 of 2006 Dated 14.6.2011 Between: P.Lingam. …Petitioners. And: The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bus Depot, Tandoor, R.R.District. …Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.5747 of 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the impugned award dated 18.3.2004 made in I.D.No.92 of 2001, published on 30.6.2004, in so far as denying the entire back wages and attendant benefits and to declare the same as arbitrary, unjust and in violation of Articles 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondent-Corporation to pay back wages along with all consequential benefits. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he joined in the respondent’s Corporation on 18.11.1985 as Conductor on regular basis and since then, he has been working as such till he was removed from service vide order dated 17.7.2000 on the ground that he was involved in cash and ticket irregularities while conducting the bus service on 18.3.2000. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred an appeal, which was rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 29.9.2000. Then, he raised I.D.No.663 of 2000, before the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad and the said I.D. was transferred to the Industrial Tribunal-1, Hyderabad wherein it was numbered as I.D.No.92 of 2001. It is his further case that while he was conducting the bus service on 18.3.2000 in between Tandoor and Nagulapally Ex.stage Nos.1 to 6, a check was conducted by the checking officials at stage No.5 and in that connection, a memo was issued alleging as under: i. failed to observe the rule issue and start and ii. failed to issue the ticket to one full and half who boarded the bus at Tandoor and bound to Nagulapally, in spite of collecting the fare i.e., 11.50. It is his further that he submitted his explanation to the effect that he had issued tickets to all including two passengers also. At the time of checking there were about 77 passengers. But these passengers could not show the tickets due to misplacement of the tickets issued to them and thereby, requested to verify the issue as per the SR. But the Checking officials obtained all the check documents forcibly as per their version. Subsequently, an enquiry was initiated against him and basing on the report of the enquiry officer, he was removed from service on 17.7.2000. Aggrieved by the same, he approached the Industrial Tribunal, and the Tribunal having found that the punishment of removal is disproportionate to the gravity of the charges, allowed the petition in part setting aside the impugned order and directing the respondent to reinstate him into service, without back wages from the date of the order of removal till the date of reinstatement and with continuity of service without monetary benefits, within a month from the date of publication of the award. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner-workman. This Court admitted the writ petition on 23.3.2006. Heard the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the award impugned herein in so far as denying the back wages and other attendant benefits is concerned, is contrary to the material available on record. Hence, he seeks to grant the relief of back wages and other attendant benefits. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation contends that the award impugned is just and proper and it needs no interference. At this stage, it is to be noted as to the gravity of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, in order to consider his request for back wages and other attendant benefits. The fact remains undisputed that the alleged cash irregularity involved in the instant case, is Rs.11.50ps. A perusal of the record goes to show that the petitioner issued tickets to more than 77 passengers including shortest distance and minimum fare stage passengers. As could be seen from the report of the enquiry officer, the petitioner issued good number of tickets to all the passengers even in heavy capacity except to the passenger mentioned in charge No.2 and therefore, there was no fraudulent intention on his part in not issuing the tickets to the passengers mentioned in Charge No.2. At this stage, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the enquiry officer has not verified the ticket block and S.R. in spite of the protest made by the petitioner that the checking officials have not verified the ticket block with reference to the S.R and therefore, it amounts to cause prejudice to the case of the petitioner as rightly observed by the tribunal. But, the tribunal having observed and concurred with the view taken by the enquiry officer that the petitioner issued a good number of tickets to all the passengers even in heavy crowd of passengers except one passenger and having ordered for reinstatement of the petitioner into service, ought not to have denied the relief of back wages and other attendant benefits to the petitioner. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the impugned award is modified to the effect that the respondent-Corporation shall reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and without back wages. The respondent-Corporation shall grant notional increments and attendant benefits to the petitioner during the period from the date of removal to the date of reinstatement. Subject to the above modification, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice G.CHANDRAIAH Dated 14.6.2011. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.5747 of 2006 Dated 14.6.2011