HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.54 OF 2003 ORDER: The petitioner was working as a Conductor in the Kuppam Depot of APSRTC. While he was conducting a bus on 24-02-1999 on the route from V. Kota to Ramakuppa, a check was caused on the way. It was alleged that the petitioner collected as um of Rs.17-50 ps. from seven individual passengers towards fare, but failed to issue tickets. A charge sheet was issued, but the petitioner denied the allegations. Departmental enquiry was conducted and the charges framed against the petitioner were held proved. The respondent passed an order dated 07-06-1999 terminating the services of the petitioner. The appeal preferred against it was dismissed on 19-07- 1999. Ultimately, the petitioner filed I.D. No.267 of 1999 before the Labour Court, Ananthapur. Award, dated 10-04-2002, was passed by the Labour Court dismissing the I.D. Hence, this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the seven passengers in question, were in two batches of 4 and 3 and when some discussion was taking place as to the adequacy of the fare or the obligation to pay the amount, the check took place. He contends that the checking officials as well as the enquiry officer drawn inference without any valid basis. Learned counsel submits that the punishment imposed against the petitioner is too harsh. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the charge against the petitioner is very serious in nature and he failed to issue tickets as many as seven passengers even after collecting the fare. She contends that the previous conduct of the petitioner is blameworthy and he does not deserve any sympathy. 4. Charges against the petitioner are that he collected Rs.17-50 ps. towards fare from seven individual passengers, but failed to issue tickets. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that he collected the fare and did not issue tickets. Explanation offered by him was that all the seven passengers boarded after the starting point, and they were pressing for levy of less amount of fare on the ground that they have crossed some distance by walk. If that were be so, the amount ought not to have been in his hand. Once, the amount, which is sufficient towards fare, was collected, the tickets ought to have been issued. The justification pleaded by the petitioner in non-issuance of the tickets is difficult to accept. 5. It is no doubt true that in the course of duties, the conductors would face several situations and there would be exceptional omissions. However, if the omission is as to collection of fare itself, a lenient view can be taken. Where the fare is collected and the tickets are not issued, hardly there would be any room for sympathy. Added to that, the track record of the petitioner is very bad. He has been imposed the punishments of withholding of increments on seven occasions and basic pay was directed to be reduced on two occasions. Two more punishments of similar nature are said to have been imposed. All, on the grounds of persistent irregularities. It is not at all safe to have such persons as conductors. The Labour Court has taken the correct view of the matter. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J December 22, 2010. KTL