In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... R.S.A. No.3301 of 1987 ..... Date of decision:16.9.2011 The State of Punjab .....Appellant v. Avtar Singh .....Respondent .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL ..... 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? ...... Present: Mr. Ranvir S. Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the appellant. Mr. H.P.S. Rahi, Advocate for the respondent. ..... Mohinder Pal, J. The present is appeal by the State of Punjab against the judgment of reversal passed by the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide which the finding of the trial Court has been reversed. The respondent-plaintiff was working as Conductor in the Punjab Roadways, Nawanshahar Depot. On 3.4.1982, his bus was checked near Moga by the checking staff and it was found that 22 passengers boarded the bus from Jagroan to Moga and out of them 15 had been issued tickets without charging any fare and 7 other passengers were not issued R.S.A. No.3301 of 1987 [2] any ticket at all. In this way, the plaintiff alleged to have embezzled Government money to the tune of `16.10 as he was likely to charge this money from the passengers at the time of their alighting from the bus. On the basis of these allegations, an inquiry was conducted and after affording personal hearing the services of the plaintiff were terminated vide order dated 4.1.1983. Aggrieved from this order of termination, plaintiff approached the Court of Sub Judge 3rd Class, Jalandhar by way of suit for declaration to the effect that the order dated 4.1.1983 passed by the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Nawanshahar by virtue of which services of the plaintiff have been terminated and the order dated 27.10.1983 passed by the Divisional Manager, Transport Department, Jalandhar were illegal, wrong, ultra vires, against the principles of natural justice etc. The trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff, however, in appeal the findings of the trial Court were reversed as there was no evidence of misconduct or mala fide intention on the part of the appellant in not issuing tickets to 7 passengers. Aggrieved from this order of the appellate Court, the appellant State has come in appeal. I have heard learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent. Following substantial question of law is involved in this case:-. “Whether the person can be held guilty and removed from service in absence of documentary proof regarding charges of embezzlement leveled against him?” Leaned Deputy Advocate General has submitted that the impugned orders in question dated 4.1.1983 and 27.10.1983 were passed after holding regular departmental inquiry and giving opportunity of being heard to the R.S.A. No.3301 of 1987 [3] respondent. It was further submitted that 22 passengers had boarded the bus on its way to Moga and at the time of checking 7 passengers were without tickets while other 15 passengers were issued tickets but no money had been charged from them. In view of this omission, the mala fide intention of the respondent was proved and accordingly, the orders in question were valid and illegal. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has referred to the evidence recorded at the time of inquiry and has submitted that in absence of mala fide intention on part of the respondent, the impugned orders have been rightly held to be null and void and has finally prayed for dismissal of the appeal. In order to prove the offence in this case apart from the fact that certain passengers were traveling without ticket or the other passengers had been issued ticket but no money was charged from them, the appellants are further required to prove that there was some mala fide intention on part of the respondent to dishonestly defraud his employer. It is not disputed that respondent-Avtar Singh had issued the tickets to 15 passengers but had not even collected the money from them. The Inquiry report also corroborates this fact that the flying squad collected `55.60 from the passengers for which tickets have been issued by the Conductor. In the explanation furnished by the Conductor, it has been submitted that the passengers started arguing with him on the point of number of persons at that time. From his explanation, it is also apparent that some of the passengers were sitting on the roof top. In order to sort out the confusion, he stopped the bus near the power-house and asked the passengers sitting on the roof to come down in order to count them and in order to issue the tickets to the R.S.A. No.3301 of 1987 [4] remaining passengers but by that time the flying squad came an found him guilty of not issuing tickets to 7 passengers and not collecting money from the 15 passengers which were issued the tickets. From the facts of the case, I am of the considered opinion that mala fide intention on the part of the respondent is not proved in this case. By no stretch of imagination the explanation furnished by the respondent can be said to be a lame excuse. Normally, the Courts should not interfere in the inquiry proceedings as the Court is not to sit in judgment over the findings of the Inquiry Officer and scope of interference of the Court is limited to the extent that it is to see that the principles of natural justice have been followed and proper procedure had been adopted during the course of inquiry. However, the Court can interfere in the findings of the Inquiry Officer if there is flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and the same are passed upon no evidence whatsoever. Resultantly, I find no fault with the judgment and decree of the appellate Court and the present appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. September 16, 2011. (Mohinder Pal) Judge *hsp*