THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 15751 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner was employed as a Conductor, in the Jammalamadugu Depot of APSRTC. He was issued a charge sheet dated 30.8.2003, alleging that while conducting the bus from Jammalamadugu to Bangalore on 21.8.2003, he issued totally unrelated tickets to two passengers, having collected fare of Rs.160/-; similarly, from a batch of three passengers, he collected a sum of Rs.165/-, and from another batch of two passengers, a sum of Rs.178/-, and issued unrelated tickets to them, for diﬀerent destinations. The petitioner submitted explanation denying the allegation. In the departmental enquiry conducted, the charges framed against the petitioner were held proved. The 3rd respondent issued order, dated 8.1.2004, removing the petitioner from service. The departmental remedies of appeal and review, did not yield any results. Therefore, he ﬁled I.D.No.112 of 2004, before the Labour Court, Anantapur. The Labour Court passed an award, dated 23.4.2008, dismissing the I.D. Hence, this writ petition. Sri S.M. Subhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the enquiry conducted against the petitioner was totally unsatisfactory. He contends that the petitioner issued certain tickets by mistake, and soon after the mistake was noticed, he corrected the entries in the Statistical Report. He submits that the punishment awarded against the petitioner is disproportionate, to the charges framed against him. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the charges are very serious, and the petitioner had committed blatant fraud on the Corporation. The charges framed against the petitioner are very serious in nature. He was conducting a long distance service and naturally, the fares were very high. From as many as seven passengers, whose journey was very long enough, he collected very high amounts towards fare and issued totally unrelated tickets. The motive to commit fraud on the Corporation was clear and evident. Such a blatant fraud cannot be pushed under the carpet, with the plea of mistake. The question of a conductor coming into possession of unrelated tickets does not arise. It is a well designed and calculated eﬀort to defraud the Corporation. But for the timely check conducted by the oﬃcials, the petitioner would have enriched himself with the income that must have passed on to the Corporation. The Depot Manager, the Appellate and Review authorities, and the Labour Court, had examined the matter from correct perspective, and assigned cogent reasons, in support of their conclusions. This court is not inclined to interfere with the same. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 22nd July 2008 PAN