IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3696 OF 2009 Rajendra Shankar Zagade ...Petitioner Vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation and one anr. .. Respondents --- Shri M.S. Topkar for Petitioner Shri G.S. Hegde i/b. M/s. G.S. Hegde & Associates for Respondents ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 24TH APRIL, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the Respondents. 2. The Petitioner is challenging the order dated 27.2.2009 passed by the Industrial Court, Kolhapur in Revision Application (ULP) No.238 of 2006 whereby the Industrial Court was pleased to confirm the order dated 29.11.2006 passed by the Labour Court dismissing the Complaint of the Petitioner being Complaint (ULP) No.20 of 2006 wherein he had challenged a show cause notice issued by the Respondents herein asking why the services of the Petitioner should not be terminated in view of the finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer against him. 3. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are as under:- The Petitioner was working as a conductor with the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and on 15.7.2004 his bus was checked at Miraj Bus Stand and allegation against him was that he had accepted Rs.250/- from a passenger. Though the fare was Rs.228/-, he did not refund the balance of Rs.22/- and, after, the bus reached its destination, he took back the tickets which were issued to the passengers. Other charges were also levelled against him. An enquiry was held. The Enquiry Officer held that the Petitioner is guilty of the alleged misconduct. A show cause notice was issued asking the Petitioner why his services should not be terminated. The proposed action was challenged by the Petitioner by filing a complaint under the MRTU and PULP Act. The Labour Court dismissed the same and the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer were confirmed. It has been held by the Apex Court in several cases that the management should not be expected to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. 4. In my view, both the Labour Courts and the Industrial Court were justified in confirming the order passed by the Enquiry Officer. 5. In the circumstances, no case is made out to interfere with the orders passed by both the Courts below. 5. Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. V.M. KANADE J.