IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6806 of 2008 Between: The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Puttaparthy, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 C.R.Krishna, E.408148, C/o.C.Veeranna, Opp: to JNTU College of Engineering, Suseela Reddy Colony, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Chairman-cum-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to I.D.No.298 of 2003 on the file of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ananthapur and quash the Award dated 2.2.2007 and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6806 of 2008 ORDER: The 1st respondent is employed as a Conductor in Puttaparthy Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. A check took place on 15.01.2002, when the 1st respondent was conducting a bus, on the route from Kothacheruvu to Taamarlu. Alleging that the 1st respondent failed to collect fare and issue tickets to four individual passengers, a charge sheet was issued and departmental enquiry was conducted. The petitioner removed the 1st respondent from service, through order, dated 14.05.2002. After exhausting the departmental remedies, the 1st respondent approached the Labour Court, Anantapur, by filing I.D.No.298 of 2003 under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Through its award, dated 02.02.2007, the Labour Court had set aside the order of removal and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service and attendant benefits, but without back wages. The award is challenged in this writ petition. Ms. W.V.S.Rajeswari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge against the 1st respondent was found proved and the Labour Court was not justified in setting aside the order of removal. She contends that the 1st respondent was not supposed to permit any passengers to board the bus, after closure of statistical report. The gravamen of the charge leveled against the 1st respondent is that he failed to collect fare and issue tickets to four individual passengers, who boarded the bus at Kothacheruvu and were found alighting at Marukuntapalli. The 1st respondent pleaded that the said passengers, who were in intoxicated condition, have boarded the bus, just before the arrival of the stage, and even before he could take any steps, the next stage arrived and that the check took place. The record discloses that the checking officials themselves have levied fine of Rs.25/- each on the four passengers and it was not even alleged that they have paid fare to the 1st respondent. The Labour Court took note of these facts and opined that the order of removal was unwarranted. Though the order of removal was set aside, the 1st respondent stood to loss in the form of the back wages for the period from the date of the removal till the date of reinstatement. That itself is a big disadvantage suffered by the 1st respondent for the minor lapse on his part. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned award. The Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 31.03.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6806 of 2008 Date: 31.03.2008 JSU