HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI WRIT PETITION NO:6810 OF 2000 DATED:19.8.2010. Between: H.M.T. Bearings Limited, represented by its General Manager, Moulali, Hyderabad …Petitioner And 1. A.C. Challan and another. …Respondents. This Court made the following: HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI WRIT PETITION NO:6810 OF 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the award dated 9.9.1999 passed by the Labour Court III, Hyderabad in I.D.No.187 of 1993. The 1st respondent-workman filed the above I.D. before the Labour Court seeking his reinstatement into service with all backwages with continuity of service. It is the case of the workman that he worked as Mill Wright Mechanic in the Industry and he served for 19 years without any allegation. On 1.9.1988, the industry issued a charge sheet-cum-suspension orders alleging that he tried to commit a theft of an article worth Rs.2,500/- and after conducting an enquiry, he was dismissed from service. The Labour Court having observed that the workman had 19 years of service in the industry and on the charge of theft, he was removed from service in the year 1988 and that stoppage of 3 increments with cumulative effect from 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92 and denial of 60% of backwages is sufficient and proportionate punishment for the proved misconduct against the workman, allowed the petition setting aside the order of removal. Further, the Labour Court held that the workman is entitled for his reinstatement into service with continuity of service with 40% of backwages and attendant benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the Industry filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that on 21.4.2000 while admitting the writ petition, this Court granted interim suspension subject to the operation of the provisions of Section 17(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The learned Counsel for the petitioner-Industry contended that even though the Labour Court found that the charge of theft had been proved, but directed the management of the Industry to reinstate the workman with 40% backwages and that by way of compliance of the provisions of Section 17(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, more than 40% had been paid and apart from that, the workman retired from service and that the Industry has also become sick industry. The fact remains that the Labout Court found the workman guilty of the charge levelled against him. In these circumstances and in view of the compliance of the provisions of 17(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act and in view of the above submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner-Industry, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case wherein the award of the Labour Court can be modified to that of reinstatement without 40% backwages. But however, the award of the Labour Court is confirmed in all other respects. With the above modification, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari Date:19.08.2010 NN HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI WRIT PETITION NO:6810 OF 2000 DATE:19.8.2010