SCA/10596/2005 1/8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10596 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================= = 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================= = DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER - Petitioner(s) Versus KHEDA DIVISION ST EMPLOYEES UNION - Respondent(s) ========================================= = Appearance : MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA for Petitioner No(s).: 1. NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No(s).: 1. ================================================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 17/08/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.Though served, nobody appears on behalf of respondent. Hence, this Court has no other alternative but to decide and dispose of the present Special Civil SCA/10596/2005 2/8 JUDGMENT Application on merits ex-parte. 2.In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad, dated 27.9.2004 passed in Reference (ITN) No.68/2000 by which the Industrial Tribunal has partly allowed the said Reference by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the First Appellate Authority dated 27.1.1998 by which the punishment was imposed to put the respondent one stage down however, did not pass any order with regard to any backwages on quashing and setting aside the order of punishment. 3.The respondent workman was serving as a Driver and Departmental Inquiry was initiated against him on the charge that he has allowed 2 passengers in the cabin of the driver without any tickets and the respondent workman was charge-sheeted. It was also alleged against him that he has quarreled with the members of the Checking Squad and he become angry at the time when the Reporter and the members of the checking squad was recovering penalty from the said 2 passengers. The charge was held to be proved against him and the SCA/10596/2005 3/8 JUDGMENT punishment came to be imposed by the Disciplinary Authority by putting the respondent to two stages down in the existing pay-scale. It appears from the record that the respondent workman preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the First Appellate Authority modified the said punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority and reduced the same to putting the respondent workman to one stage down. The respondent workman raised industrial dispute challenging the order passed by the First Appellate Authority by which the respondent workman was put to one stage down in the existing pay-scale and the dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad for its adjudication being Reference (ITN) No.68/2000. The Industrial Tribunal though held that 2 passengers who were the relatives of the workman-driver were travelling in the cabin of the driver without tickets. However, considering the fact that though the relatives are not permitted to travel in the bus without tickets that too in the cabin of the driver, it is the normal practice and at sometimes the drivers and conductors are tempted to allow their relatives to travel in the bus without tickets and therefore, considering the misconduct in a very casual manner, the Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad partly allowed the said Reference by SCA/10596/2005 4/8 JUDGMENT judgment and award dated 27.9.2001 and even quashed and set aside the order passed by the First Appellate Authority dated 27.1.1998 by which the respondent workman was put to one stage down in the existing pay- scale however, did not grant any arrears on quashing and setting aside the said order of punishment. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad dated 27.9.2004 passed in Reference (ITN) No.68/2000, the petitioner corporation has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 4.Ms. Tejal Shah, learned advocate appearing for Ms. S.K.Mandavia, learned advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner corporation has vehemently submitted that though it is proved not only before the Disciplinary Authority but also before the Industrial Tribunal that the respondent workman driver had allowed 2 passengers in his cabin without tickets and he might have quarreled with the Officer at the time of recovery of penalty, the Industrial Tribunal was not justified in interfering with the order of punishment imposed by the First Appellate Authority, more particularly, when the First Appellate Authority itself has reduced the SCA/10596/2005 5/8 JUDGMENT punishment. It is further submitted by her that the Industrial Tribunal has dealt with the allegation and the charge proved against the respondent workman very casually and in a casual manner has held that though it is not permissible for the driver or conductor to allow their relatives to travel in the bus without tickets, they are tempted to allow their relatives to travel in the bus and therefore, quashed and set aside the order of punishment, which is nothing but exercising of powers under Section 11(A) of the I.D.Act not judicious and even the finding by the Industrial Tribunal is perverse and therefore, it is requested to allow the present Special Civil Application. 5.It is not in dispute that 2 passengers who were relatives i.e. Brother-in-law of the respondent workman driver were found in the cabin of the driver and were travelling in the bus without tickets and when it was found by the checking squad that those passengers were travelling without any tickets and when the fine was to be collected, the respondent workman become angry and quarreled with the members of the checking squad and the said charge is held to be proved by the Inquiry Officer in the Departmental Inquiry and even by the Industrial Tribunal. However, though the Industrial SCA/10596/2005 6/8 JUDGMENT Tribunal has held that there is no such practice and/or rule by which the driver and/or conductor are permitted to allow their relatives to travel in the bus without tickets, normaly they are tempted to allow their relatives to travel in the S.T.Bus without tickets and dealing with the said charge and the misconduct in very casual manner, the Industrial Tribunal set aside the order of punishment imposed by the First Appellate Authority by which even the First Appellate Authority has imposed the punishment of putting the respondent workman to one stage down only. Allowing the passengers i.e. relatives without tickets and thereafter, having cought by the checking squad, became angry and quarreling with the members of the checking squad is a serious misconduct and there is monetary loss to the S.T. Corporation also. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of decisions not issuing the tickets to the passengers and allowing them to travel in the bus is a serious misconduct, and it will not only lead monetary loss to the corporation but it will lead to the loss of confidence also for which even punishment of dismissal is justified. In the present case, admittedly the driver has allowed 2 passengers i.e. his relatives to travel in the bus without tickets and even the statement of the passengers i.e. brother-in-law of SCA/10596/2005 7/8 JUDGMENT the respondent workman was recorded in which he has admitted that the respondent workman has told him not to take tickets. The Disciplinary Authority itself has taken a lenient view in not dismissing the respondent workman from service and the Disciplinary Authority imposed punishment of putting the respondent workman to two stages down in the existing pay-scale, which was further reduced by the First Appellate Authority to putting the respondent workman to one stage down only. Under the circumstances, to interfere with even the said punishment and to quash and set aside the same is nothing but a non-judicious exercise of powers by the Industrial Tribunal and the reasoning for quashing and setting aside the said punishment is also perverse. By interfering with the order of punishment imposed by the First Appellate Authority, the Industrial Tribunal has not only exceeded the jurisdiction but has not acted judiciously, which cannot be permitted to stand. Under the circumstances, the judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal cannot be sustained and the same is required to be quashed and set aside. 6.For the reasons stated above, the petition succeeds. The judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad dated 27.9.2004 passed in Reference SCA/10596/2005 8/8 JUDGMENT (ITN) No.68/2000 is hereby quashed and set aside and the order imposed by the First Appellate Authority dated 27.1.1998 is hereby restored. 7.Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent however, there will be no order as to costs. (M.R.SHAH, J.) kdc.