IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:17133 of 1999 Between: G.RAJENDER, S/o Sunkamsa, R/o Post Bekkam, Pedda Bolku, Via Pebbair, Mahaboobnagar District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Shadnagar Depot, Mahaboobnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for Respondent No.2: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorari to quash award, dated 15.03.1999 passed in I.D.No.162 of 1998 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, (for short ‘the Tribunal’), respondent No.1. The petitioner, who was working as a Conductor in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) – respondent No.2 on daily wages, was faced with charge sheet for the alleged misconduct, while he was conducting vehicle bearing No.AEZ 5357 on the route Shadnagar to Enkiryal on 26.04.1991. The following charges were framed against the petitioner. 1. For having violated the rule ‘Issue & Start’. 2. For having collected an amount of Rs.1.50 ps from a passenger who boarded the bus at Kasulabad and alighting at Enkiryal, ex-stages 20 to 19/7. 3. For having failed to collect the fare and issue tickets to two passengers who boarded the bus at Kasulabad and alighting at Enkiryal, ex-stages 20 to 19/7. 4. For having failed to collect the fare and issue tickets to two passengers who boarded the bus at Kasulabad and abound for Nawabpet, ex-stages 20 to 10. After considering the explanation of the petitioner, regular departmental enquiry was initiated and order, dated 17.07.1992 was passed removing him from service. He raised an industrial dispute, which was registered as I.D.No.162 of 1998 before the Tribunal. He conceded on the validity of the domestic enquiry before the Tribunal. In it’s award, the Tribunal observed that the petitioner did not dispute any of the allegations made against him. The petitioner, however, sought to justify his failure to issue tickets on the grounds, such as, his verbal dual with a lambada passenger over luggage charges and that a passenger, who was travelling from a long distance lost the ticket of denomination of Rs.4.25 ps., which was issued to him by the petitioner and produced the ticket of denomination of Rs.1.50 ps., which was a used one, to save his own skin. The Tribunal found that though the petitioner technically violated the Corporation’s Regulations in not observing the rule ‘Issue and Start’ and not collecting the fare of Rs.1.50 ps. from a passenger, who boarded the bus at Kasulabad alighted at Enkiryal and also by not collecting the fare and issuing tickets to the passengers, who boarded the bus at Kasulabad Stages 20 to 19/7 and 20 to 10 under charges 2 to 4, he did not have fraudulent intention in the commission of these lapses. The Tribunal, having considered the past conduct of the petitioner took a lenient view and held that the punishment of removal from service is too harsh. On this premise, it directed the petitioner’s reinstatement as a fresh candidate without back wages. In my view, the Tribunal properly exercised its discretion vested in it under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner failed to make out a case for granting of a further relief by this Court in his favour. In this view of the matter, I do not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 19th NOVEMBER, 2008. kvni