( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 596 OF 2002 The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon. PETITIONER VERSUS Vasudeo Shama Bodade, R/o Edlabad, Behind S.T. Depot, Edlabad, Dist. Jalgaon. RESPONDENT ..... Mr. Vasant Yadav, advocate, holding for Mr. M.K. Goyanka, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.V. Wani, advocate for the respondent. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 17th June, 2009] ORAL JUDGEMENT : 1. By this petition, the petitioner impugns judgements and orders rendered by learned Judge, Labour Court, Jalgaon, in complaint (ULP) No. 120/1995 and by learned Member of the Industrial Court, Jalgaon, in revision application (ULP) No. 363/1999 (old No. 8/1997) ( 2 ) on 4th December, 1996 and 17th July, 2001, respectively. 2. The respondent was employed as conductor on establishment of the petitioner. He was on duty on 29th March, 1993 as conductor of S.T. bus which was plied on Edlabad-Khirdi route. It appears that said S.T. bus was supposed to have night halt at village Khirdi and to commence return journey in the early morning of the next day. Thus, the S.T. bus was to return from village Khirdi to Edlabad on 30th March, 1993. The return journey was scheduled to commence at 6 a.m. Still, however, the S.T. bus did not commence the return journey as per the scheduled time. The Assistant Traffic Superintendent (A.T.S.) of the S.T. Depot at Edlabad received intimation from driver of the S.T. bus for necessity of substitute in order to help him to undertake the transportation work. The A.T.S. went to help the driver. On the way, near village Nimbhora, the A.T.S. came across the S.T. bus which was without passengers. The driver informed him that the respondent (conductor) was unable to attend the duty due to his being under influence of liquor. The respondent then falsely ( 3 ) reported that he had fallen down from the S.T. bus at the relevant time. The A.T.S. conducted alcohol test panchanama and noticed that the respondent had consumed the liquor. There was loss caused due to misconduct of the respondent and, therefore, he was subjected to disciplinary inquiry. A charge-sheet was filed against him under clauses (10), (11), (22) and (42) of the Discipline and Appeal Rules applicable to the petitioner’s staff members. The respondent was found guilty and was dismissed from service. 3. The respondent challenged his dismissal by filing proceedings in the Labour Court under provisions of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short, “the MRTU & PULP Act”). The learned Judge of the Labour Court came to the conclusion that the inquiry was fairly conducted as per the procedure, but the misconduct was not duly proved and the punishment of dismissal was shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the alleged misconduct. Thus, it was held that the petitioner committed unfair labour practice under Item ( 4 ) (i) of Schedule-IV of the MRTU & PULP Act. The Labour Court directed reinstatement of the respondent without backwages. The findings of the Labour Court were challenged by filing revision application No. 363/1999. The learned Member of the Industrial Court dismissed the revision application. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. There are concurrent findings of the two (2) Courts below. Clinching question is as to whether the findings are perverse or arbitrary. It is important to mention here that admittedly, medical examination of the respondent was not conducted in order to verify whether he had consumed certain alcoholic preparation at the material time. The written statement of the petitioner showed certain inconsistencies. For example, it was contended that the A.T.S. came across the S.T. bus without passengers therein near village Nimbhora. However, it was also stated that statements of some passengers were recorded. ( 5 ) 6. It is pertinent to note that the S.T. bus was to commence return journey at 6 a.m. There may be some passengers awaiting the S.T. bus at village Khirdi. There is nothing on record to show that those passengers made complaints about consumption of liquor by the respondent and the misconduct which allegedly caused delay in commencement of the return journey. The findings of the facts recorded by both the Courts below would show that legal and acceptable evidence was not placed on record. It is true that finding can be rendered in the departmental inquiry on the basis of probability and the charge being truth-bearing. Still, however, it cannot be said that without proper medical corroboration, the charge was satisfactorily proved. The mere fact that smell of alcohol was emanating from mouth of the respondent would not suffice the purpose to bring home guilt to him. The finding that he had consumed some alcoholic preparation is based on physical appearance and the smell of the mouth. It was contention of the respondent that he had fallen from the S.T. bus and had used some medicines. In any case, unless the findings of both the Courts are shown to be ( 6 ) perverse, or arbitrary, it is difficult to interfere with such findings in the exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction. The inquiry papers are not placed on record. It is not known of which passengers the statements were recorded during the inquiry because the S.T. bus was being driven without passengers, when the A.T.S. came across it. 7. In view of the peculiar fact situation of the present case, I do not find any substance in the petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed. NO costs. 8. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, civil application No. 2107/2007 does not survive and hence, stands dismissed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/WP596-02