HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 22268 OF 2003 . DATED 30th September, 2011 BETWEEN Mohd. Waheeduddin …Petitioner And APSRTC, rep. by its Managing Director Musheerbad, Hyderba and anr ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 22268 of 2003 ORDER: Challenging the Award dated 20.05.2003 passed by the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad in I.D.No. 3 of 2001, the petitioner-workman filed the present Writ Petition. By the said Award, the Labour Court confirmed punishment of removal imposed upon the petitioner by the authorities of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation ( for short ‘the APSRTC’). The petitioner was appointed as a cleaner in the service of the respondent-APSRTC on casual basis on 23.08.1988 and his services were regularized with effect from 13.2.1989. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Mechanic Grade.II on 2.4.1990. It is the case of the petitioner that during the year 1994 he suffered from severe Jaundice and approached the APSRTC Hospital, at Tarnaka, Hyderabad for treatment. The petitioner submitted medical certificates in proof of his ailment in different spells of intervals and sought leave. While so, when the petitioner reported to duty on 18.12.1998, the respondent-APSRTC refused to taken him on duty. As such, he filed Writ Petition No. 3456 of 1999. The respondent-APSRTC filed counter in the said Writ Petition informing that the petitioner was removed from service. This Court while disposing of the Writ Petition gave liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy of approaching the Labour Court. Accordingly, he raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No.3 of 2001. The Labour Court upon consideration of the evidence placed on record, confirmed the order of removal from service while dismissing the said ID holding that the petitioner was not entitled to reinstatement and consequential benefits, however, he is entitled to retirement benefits treating the order of removal as voluntary retirement. Hence the present Writ Petition. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Labour Court failed to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He argued that though the petitioner had submitted leave letters which were marked under Exs.W1 to W.4 for extension of leave from 5.4.1994 to 28.5.1994 on medical grounds, the Labour Court failed to appreciate that the petitioner had given prior intimation to his authorities and he was undergoing treatment. He submitted that as per the Regulations Nos.IV and V of the Leave and Medical Attendance Regulations, 1963 the employee availed leave on the ground of reporting sick is not a misconduct and as such the charge sheet issued to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was absented to duties from 1.4.1994 without any intimation and prior sanction of leave is illegal and arbitrary. Perused the case file. The petitioner was absent to duties from 3.4.1994 to 18.12.1998. It is the case of the petitioner that he was suffering from severe Jaundice and he had undergone medication in the APSRTC Hospital, Tarnaka, Hyderabad and that he submitted leave letters at the relevant times for sanction of leave in prior intimation to the APSRTC authorities. The respondent-APSRTC issued charge sheet on 16.6.1994 and conducted enquiry into the charge levelled against the petitioner as per the procedure laid down under the Regulations and removed the petitioner from service vide order dated 11.8.1995. Though it is the plea of the of the petitioner before this court that he had undergone treatment in the APSRTC Hospital, Tarnaka, Hyderabad, the material on record discloses that the petitioner had submitted private doctors medical certificates for the different periods to cover up his leave on medical grounds. It is not known as to why the petitioner could not take treatment from the hospital of the APSRTC at Tarnaka and resorted to have medical treatment from private doctors. Further it is to be seen that Ex.M.5 medical certificate dated 27.7.1994 contains that the petitioner had suffered from Hyperacidity. Nowhere it was stated that the petitioner had suffered from Jaundice for a short period or for a longer period. Even according to the plea of the petitioner before this Court that he had suffered from severe jaundice, it is highly doubtful as to whether such long time from 3.4.1994 to 18.12.1998 would take to cure the said disease. Even if it is a severe jaundice, such long time would not take for medication to cure the said decease. It appears that the petitioner had abandoned the job and left some where and again having come back now sought for reinstatement. It is well settled that if the employee produces medical certificates in proof of his ailment, it does not amount to misconduct. In the case on hand, it is not known as to why he had not availed medical facilities from APSRTC Hospital, Tarnaka, Hyderabad, he being the resident of Hyderabad. Further, even if he was suffering from severe jaundice, nowhere in the medical certificates submitted by him contains that he had suffered from the said disease. Furthermore, the disease of Jaundice, even if it was in advance stage, such a long time of more than four years would not be required for medication. The petitioner had submitted letters for extension of leave viz., Exs.W1 to W4 from 3.4.1994 to 28.5.1994. Thereafter the petitioner neither submitted any letter nor reported to duty. The respondent-APSRTC issued charge sheet on 16.6.1994 and conducted enquiry as per the procedure laid down under the Regulations governing it and passed the order of removal dated 11.8.1995. The Labour Court, upon consideration of the evidence on record, confirmed the order of removal passed against the petitioner while taking a lenient view, treating the order of removal as voluntary retirement and directing the respondent-APSRTC to pay the retirement benefits to the petitioner. In my opinion that itself is more than a substantial relief having due regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. For the foregoing discussion, I do not see any merit in the Writ Petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ------------------------------------ -- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 30th September, 2011. Msnro