SCA/10887/2008 1/6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10887 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Petitioner Versus HUSEN B RAYMA C/O INDRAVADAN R MEHTA ADVOCATE - Respondent ========================================================= Appearance : MR HS MUNSHAW for Petitioner : 1, MR MUKESH H. RATHOD for Respondent : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT Date : 04/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Mr. Rathod, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith. 2. The petitioner GSRTC has challenged the order SCA/10887/2008 2/6 JUDGMENT and Award dated 29.4.2008 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhuj in Reference (LCG) No. 159 of 1998 directing the payment of 50% of the back wages and other incidental benefits to the workman from the date of his termination till his attaining the age of superannuation. 3. The respondent workman had to raise industrial dispute as the punishment of dismissal came to be imposed upon him in respect of an incident occurred on 24.3.1996, wherein, it was alleged that the respondent workman with a view to avoid issuance of ticket, had not issued tickets till the bus was intercepted and when he saw the raiding party, attempted to issue tickets though fare was collected. The Inquiry was conducted and ultimately, the same culminated into dismissal of the workman on 2.11.1996. Thereafter, the workman failed in Appeal and ultimately, he has to raise industrial dispute, which was referred to the Competent Court and Reference (LCG) No. 159/98 was thus came for adjudication. It was the case of the workman before the Court that in fact the order of dismissal was unwarranted and though he had given up the contention with regard to propriety in initiating and conducting of the inquiry and procedure of inquiry. The findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer were perverse, erroneous and such as no reasonable person in given facts and SCA/10887/2008 3/6 JUDGMENT circumstances, would arrive at the same. The Labour Court was admittedly after appreciating the evidence on record and respective contention of the parties, came to the conclusion that the charges cannot be said to have been proved as the findings were not proper. However, looking to the past conduct of defaults numbering 20, ordered payment of 50% of back wages, as during pendency of the Reference, the workman had attained the age of superannuation, so the relief of only 50% back wages from the date of dismissal till the workman attained the age of superannuation and other incidental benefits were awarded. 4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the petitioner Corporation has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. Shri Munshaw, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the Labour Court after having come to the conclusion that there were at least 20 defaults in past, ought not to have permitted the workman to go scot free as only reduction in back wages is not punishment in eye of law and therefore, the award is patently perverse so as to warrant quashing of the same by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Shri Munshaw has also submitted that the Labour Court has not SCA/10887/2008 4/6 JUDGMENT appreciated the fact that it was all along the case of the Corporation during inquiry that the workman had in fact collected fair of Rs.17/- towards fair from 8 and 1/2 passengers and only on seeing the raiding party boarding the bus, he attempted to wriggle out of his folly, issued tickets wroth Rs.20/- for Rs.2 each, which clearly was pointing to his intention to defraud, and as he saw the checking party, attempted to come out of his folly. This aspect of collecting and issuing ticket worth Rs.20 has not been appreciated by the Labour Court at all and therefore, the findings of the Labour Court on record untenable of the dismissal order of the workman, is also perverse and therefore, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. Shri Munshaw has submitted that in view of this, the petition deserves to be allowed and the award deserves to be quashed and set aside. 6. Shri Rathod, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has relied upon the decision of this Court in case of RAJKOT PEOPLES COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. VS. BHARATBHAI HAZARE, reported in 2008(3) p.1937 and contended that the workman had only given up his contention with regard to propriety of conducting the inquiry and not given up the contention with regard to challenge to the findings of Inquiry Officer. The finding of the Inquiry Officer being perverse, not warranting dismissal, this aspect has rightly been SCA/10887/2008 5/6 JUDGMENT appreciated by the Labour Court and taking into consideration the over all view of the facts and circumstances attending the case, Labour Court has granted appropriate relief to the workman of ordering reduction of 50% of back wages, which is the most appropriate relief and in fact does not call for any interference. However, Shri Rathod has submitted that if the Court is of the view that the quantum of 20 past defaults have weighed, then, this Court may reduce the quantum of back wages even to the tune of 25 to 30%. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. In this award, the Labour Court has recorded finding with regard to testimony of the independent witness by the workman and admission on the part of the reporter, witnesses of the Corporation with regard to no other irregularities except the irregularities in the chargesheet. It is an admitted fact that the Corporation did not suffer any monetary loss at all and the factum of issuance of ticket and the passengers numbering 8 adult and 4 children has also been brought on record. This Court is of the view that the finding with regard to absence of guilt on the part of workman qua the charges alleged, need not be disturbed. However, at the same time, it is required to be noted that the chargesheet is in respect of the provisions which have been mentioned in the chargesheet, which indicate that there was an allegation of SCA/10887/2008 6/6 JUDGMENT repetition of such practice on the part of the workman. This allegation couple in the chargesheet with quantum of 20 past defaults would lend some justification to Shri Munshaw's submission with regard to weighing the workman's conduct vis-a-vis the relief granted to him by the Court. In view of this fact, as Shri Rathod has expressed his consent for voluntarily accepting the reduction and submission for modification of the award to that extent, this Court may not dwell upon the fine nuances of substituting the penalty. Suffice it to say that in the interest of justice, the workman be declared to be entitled for receiving only 25% of the back wages and rest of the award will remain intact and factum of back wages is reduced from 50% to 25% and award stands modified to that extent only. As the award is modified, the petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 8. Shri Rathod submitted that the Corporation be directed to pay up the dues to the respondent workman as early as possible. It is expected that the petitioner Corporation will pay up the dues to the workman as early as possible. (S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) pallav