THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2951 OF 1999 DATED: 06.02.2008 Between: The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Mehdipatnam Bus Depot, Hyderabad. .. Petitioner And M.K. Khan died per L.Rs. Smt. Rasheeda Begum and others. .. Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2951 OF 1999 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the award, dated 30.07.1997, made in I.D.No.121 of 1994 on the file of the 2nd respondent - Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, whereunder the 1st respondent- workman (since died) was directed to be reinstated into service by the petitioner- management with 50% of the backwages and other attendant benefits. It appears, the 1st respondent- workman (since died), while working as Conductor in the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) at Mehdipatnam Bus Depot, Hyderabad, was alleged to have involved in a misconduct of cash and ticket irregularities and, therefore, proceeded with departmentally and, in conclusion of the said departmental proceedings, he was removed from service with effect from 06.07.1993. The appeal filed by him, questioning the order of removal from service, was rejected by the appellate authority. Thereafter, he raised a dispute, being I.D.No.121 of 1994, under Section 2-A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act’), before the 2nd respondent – Labour Court-I, Hyderabad. It was the case of the workman before the Labour Court that the enquiry was not properly conducted and there was no evidence to prove his guilt. Further, even if it is assumed that there was some misconduct on his part that would not necessitate inflicting a punishment of removal from service. Management filed a counter opposing the application filed by the workman. Before the Labour Court, on behalf of the workman, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced and, on behalf of the management, though no oral evidence was adduced, Exs.M1 to M19 were marked. After detailed consideration of the matter, the Labour Court found that though the enquiry conducted by the management was valid, copy of the enquiry officer’s report was not furnished to the workman and directly a show cause notice was issued and punishment of removal was imposed, and, thereby, the management had violated the principles of natural justice and the procedure as required under the law. Since the management has not furnished a copy of enquiry officer’s report to the workman and called for objections thereof, following the proposition laid down in the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ramzan Khan rendered in Civil Appeal No.571 of 1985, dated 20.11.1990, the Labour Court declared the removal order as illegal and ordered reinstatement of the workman into service with 50% of the backwages and attendant benefits. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition is filed by the management. Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner Corporation, strenuously contended that the Labour Court, having held that the domestic enquiry conducted by the management was valid, ought not to have held that non-furnishing of the enquiry officer’s report to the petitioner was fatal to the domestic enquiry and, therefore, the same was vitiated and the principles of natural justice were violated. He further contended that the Labour Court ought to have seen that no prejudice was caused to the workman by non- furnishing the enquiry officer’s report to him. Unfortunately, this plea was not taken by the management before the Labour Court. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Labour Court has not committed any error in holding that the domestic enquiry conducted against the workman was vitiated, in view of the fact that the enquiry officer’s report was not furnished and objections thereof were not called for from the workman before the order of removal was passed. Thus, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Since the 1st respondent- workman died and respondents 3 to 6 were brought on record as his legal representatives, the petitioner- management shall consider payment of arrears of backwages etc. and other benefits accrued to the account of the 1st respondent- workman, on his death, to the respondents 3 to 6, as per law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 6th February, 2008. IBL