IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO: 143 of 2003 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 11/09/2002 in WP No: 9068 OF 1998 on the file of the High Court.) Between: M/s.Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Visakhapatnam, rep.by its Chairman & M.D.,Rear Admiral R.M.Bhatia. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal Cum-Labour Court, Ramnagar,Visakhapatnam. 2 Mr.S.M.Joga Rao, D.No.18/146, Old Gopalapatnam,Visakhapatnam. 3 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Incharge, Labour, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.P.NAGESWAR SREE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: MR. J.C.FRACIS The Court made the following: HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO.143 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: (per T.Meena Kumari, J) This writ appeal is directed against the dismissal order of the learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 11-09-2002 made in W.P.No.9068 of 1998 confirming the award dated 16-01-1998 passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, in I.D.No.112 of 1994 filed by the second respondent herein. 2 . The appellant is the employer. The second respondent herein is the employee under the appellant. The second respondent was placed under suspension for misusing the medical facility under the Medical Reimbursement Scheme of the Appellant Company. After conducting due enquiry, the disciplinary authority removed the second respondent from service through a letter dated 01-02-1993 and the same was confirmed by the appellate authority vide letter dated 26-03-1993. 3. Aggrieved by the same the second respondent preferred I.D.No.112 of 1994, in which, the Tribunal while finding the respondent guilty of misconduct, granted the relief of reinstatement with 50% back wages continuity of service by imposing the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect, through the award dated 16-01-1998. 4. Aggrieved by the said award the appellant herein filed W.P.No.9068 of 1998 before this Court. The learned Single Judge on appreciation of the entire material placed before him observed that the punishment of termination is quite a serious one and has no nexus to the gravity of the allegation made against the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition through an order dated 11-09-2002 confirming the award of the Tribunal. Aggrieved by the same the present writ appeal is filed. 5. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and on perusal of the entire material on record, we do not find any grounds to interfere with the reasoned order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9068 of 1998 dated 11-09- 2002. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. __________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J __________________ S.ANANDA REDDY, J 24th January, 2005 SKM TO 1. The Chairman & M.D., Rear Admiral R.M.Bhatia. M/s.Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Visakhapatnam, 2 The Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal Cum-Labour Court, Ramnagar,Visakhapatnam. 3 The Secretary Incharge, Labour, Secretariat, State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 Two C.Cs. to G.P. for Labour, High Court Buildings, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. (OUT) 5. Two C.D. Copies.