1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 5368/2003. (RSRTC VS. ISHRA RAM & ORS.) DATE OF ORDER : 29.01.2007. HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. Sangeet Lodha for the petitioner/s. Mr. Vijay Mehta for the respondent/s. By this petition for writ, a challenge is given to the award dated 08.03.2002 passed by the learned Labour Court, Jodhpur in industrial dispute case no.67/2000. By the award impugned, the Labour Court set aside the order dated 19.09.98 passed by the disciplinary authority imposing upon the petitioner a penalty of stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect and for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,000/-. In brief, facts of the case are that the appropriate government under its notification dated 13.06.2000 made a reference of an industrial dispute to the Labour Court, Jodhpur for its adjudication in the terms as to whether the imposing of penalty of stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect with fine of Rs.5,000/- upon the workman Ishraram is just and valid and if not, then for what relief the workman is entitled. 2 In pursuant to the reference made, the workman filed a statement of claim stating therein that the finding given by the disciplinary authority under the order dated 19.09.98 is not substantiated by any evidence, the Enquiry Officer erred while holding the petitioner guilty for the mis-conduct alleged without having any evidence. In written statement, the employer defended the order of the disciplinary authority in general. The Labour Court after considering the material available on record reached at the conclusion that there was no evidence against the petitioner for the alleged mis-conduct and in specific term held that only witness produced on behalf of the employer, no where stated that there was any fault on part of the workman that resulted into the accident concerned. The allegation against the respondent workman was that the employer Corporation suffered a loss due to his rash and negligent driving that resulted in an accident on 30.12.92. To support the allegation one Shri Jugal Kishore was produced in witness box and his statements were recorded by the enquiry officer. I have gone through the award impugned as well as the statement given by Shri Jugal Kishore Vyas. Shri Jugal Kishore Vyas in unambiguous term stated that the vehicle at the 3 relevant time was not in high speed and the accident occurred due to some mechanical fault. The Enquiry Officer without having any evidence recorded a finding that the petitioner was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently. The disciplinary authority accepted the finding of the Enquiry Officer and imposed the penalty as aforesaid. As a matter of fact, the finding given by the Enquiry Officer and the penalty imposed upon the delinquent employee on basis of the finding above was not supported by any evidence. Shri Jugal Kishore no where said that the petitioner was at fault in any manner or he was driving the Bus with rash or negligence. On the contrary, he stated that accident occurred due to mechanical fault. The Labour Court rightly declared the order dated 19.09.1998 illegal, being not supported by any evidence. In view of whatever discussed above, I do not find any error in the award impugned that may warrant interference by this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. This petition for writ is accordingly dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/