HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.2871 of 2006 Date: December 02, 2010 Between: The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., BHEL Depot, Medak District. … Petitioner And 1. L.K. Bala Swamy & another. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.2871 of 2006 ORDER: The Management has impugned the award dated 31st December 2004 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, vide which the respondent-workman was ordered to be reinstated into service within one month from the date of publication of the award. It was further ordered that the workman shall be entitled for back wages at the rate of 60% with continuity of service and attendant benefits. 2. The first respondent-workman was appointed as a conductor on 26.12.1986. While he was conducting the bus bearing registration No.AP 9Z 7748 on route Ordinance Factory – Sangareddy on 21.4.1995, a check was conducted by the checking officials and it was detected that the workman had failed to issue a ticket to a passenger even after collecting requisite fair of Rs.2/- from the said passenger. The second charge against the first respondent was that he had failed to observe rule (issue and start), which constitutes misconduct under Regulation 28 (xxxii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 3. After going through the entire evidence the Labour Court came to the conclusion that the charge against the first respondent was very trivial in nature and he should not have been removed from service on such trivial charge. 4. Pursuant to the award passed by the Labour Court, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the workman has already been taken back in service. He further submits that out of 60% of the back wages as awarded by the Labour Court, half of the back wages were deposited by the Management as ordered by this Court and the same have already been withdrawn by the workman and therefore the award of the Labour Court should be modified to only 30% of the back wages to be awarded in favour of the workman. 5. No one is put in appearance on behalf of the workman. 6. After going through the award passed by the Labour Court and hearing the counsel for the Management, I am of the considered opinion that as the workman has already been taken back in service and also been paid 30% of the back wages, ends of justice would be met if the workman is awarded back wages at 30% in stead of 60% as awarded by the Labour Court. It is pertinent to note that the workman has been taken back in service and he has already withdrawn 30% of the back wages. The award of the Labour Court is modified to the extent indicated above. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J Date: December 02, 2010. BSB