IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 9025 of 1997 Between: P.Kondapa Naidu, S/o. Chinaveri Raghavaiah, Udayagiri Mandal, Nellore Dist,A.P., ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Labour Court , Guntur , Gunture Dist, A.P., 2. The Depot, Maanger,A.P.S.R.T.C, Nellore-I Depot, Nellore Dist., A.P., 3. The Divisonal Manager ,A.P.S.R.T.C., Nellore, Nellore Dist., A.P., .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction under art.226 of the Constitution of India, particularly one in the nature of writ of "CERTIORARI" quashing the Award issued in I.D.No.293/1993 of the Labour Court ,Guntur,dt.28-5-1995 to the extent of denying the back wages also stoppage of one Increment for one year without cumulative effect to the petitioner herein as unjust and illegal after calling for the records. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PRATTIPATI VENKATESWARLU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WP No. 9025 of 1997 ORDER: This writ petition has been instituted by a conductor working in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, for short `the corporation’, questioning the correctness of the award passed by the Labour Court, Guntur, in ID No. 293 of 1990. According to the petitioner, he has joined the service of the corporation as a conductor on 2.6.1987 and that he had rendered blemishless service of more than five years in conducting the buses on various routes, as per the duty roster allotted to him. On a mere suspicion that he has indulged in ticket issuing irregularities, he has been placed under suspicion on 27.1.1993 and thereafter subjected to disciplinary proceedings. The various instances alleging alteration of the ticket numbers said to have been made by the writ petitioner in various `statistical returns’ filed by him have all been made the subject matter of the charges. After conducting an inquiry and based on the evidence collected thereat, a good number of charges are held established. A show-cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner on 17.6.1993 proposing to inflict on him the punishment of removal from service. Notwithstanding a very substantially valid objection raised by the writ petitioner, the disciplinary authority mechanically proceeded in the matter and imposed the punishment of removal from service through its proceedings dated 6.7.1993 and hence the writ petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of the Labour Court calling in question the validity and the legality of the order of removal imposed on him as a measure of punishment. His principal contention before the Labour Court was that on a mere suspicion that he has altered the last digit numbers of the tickets in various trips, conducted by him and thus suspecting that he may have caused loss to the corporation’s `revenue’, he was proceeded against. There is in fact no material in support of the allegations and hence he could not have been inflicted with a grave punishment such as removal from service. According to the writ petitioner, unfortunately, the Labour Court fell into grave error in holding that the findings of the Enquiry Officer cannot be characterized as perverse findings. According to the learned counsel, the Labour Court has failed to take into account the fact that no allegation of misappropriation of the funds of the corporation as alleged against him was established and because of the road conditions which are mostly bad, the entries made by the petitioner in the statistical returns appeared to have been altered or corrected, whereas he has merely rewritten certain digits to make them more clear and keep them beyond any doubt or ambiguity. For the failure of the Labour Court to appreciate these contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has described the findings of the Labour Court as perverse findings and hence he contends that the award deserves to be set at naught. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the corporation contended that alteration of the last digits of the ticket numbers has been deliberately and purposefully resorted to by the petitioner, so as to enable him to recycle some of the tickets in the next trip. The contention that it is a technical error committed by the writ petitioner – conductor cannot be accepted and even otherwise such errors, cannot get repeatedly done by him. Learned counsel for the corporation has further contended that the Labour Court has shown extreme compassion and sympathy towards the cause of the writ petitioner and ordered for his reinstatement and accordingly the writ petitioner has been reinstated back to duty on 4.4.1996 with the benefit of continuity of service and the punishment imposed is too lenient a punishment and hence the same shall not be interfered with. All the conductors, like the petitioner, who work for the Corporation are liable to fill in carefully the data relating to the tickets of various denominations sold by them enroute each trip and deposit it back with the APSRTC authorities along with the revenue generated in the process. When a scrutiny of the statistical returns filed by the writ petitioner for the period between 17.9.1992 to 28.10.1992 was undertaken, a number of alterations to the ticket numbers in the relevant columns relating to the various denominations of the tickets has come to be noticed. According to the corporation, the alterations were found in the statistical returns filed by the writ petitioner for the trips undertaken by him on 17.9.1992, 23.9.1992, 24.9.1992, 28.9.1992, 1.10.1992, 7.10.1992, 12.10.1992, 16.10.1992, 19.10.1992, 26.10.1992 and 28.10.1992 and hence the writ petitioner has been placed under suspension and he has also been subjected to the disciplinary proceedings. According to the corporation, each one of the 15 instances noticed by them where the alterations took place constituted misconduct and hence, have formed part of the chargesheet. Charges: 1. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.4.25 den. In the SR No. 2482458 at relevant column against stage Nos. 1 to 5 from 799 to 792 and re- issued one of the said tickets at Stage No. 5 and 6 tickets at stage No. 8 in the up journey while performing 11-15 hrs. B.Gudur D/o. service on 7.10.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Reg. 1963”. 2. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.6-25 den. In the relevant column of SR No. 2499210 against stage Nos. 8 to 17 from 519 to 518 and re- issued the said ticket at stage No. 14 (Kaligiri) in t h e down journey while performing 19-30 hrs. Vinjamus N/s. service on 19.10.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963.” 3. For having altered the ticket numbers of RS.5-25 den. In the relevant column of SR No. 2397497 against stage Nos. 1 to 17 from 909 to 906 and re- issued the said tickets at stage No. 17 (Vinjamur) in the down trip while performing 11-15 hrs. B.Gudur N/s service on 23.9.92, which constitutes misconduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 4. For having altered the ticket number of Rs.5-25 den. In the relevant colum of SR No. 2387685 against stage Nos. 17 to 21 (Vinjamur to Chakalikonda – up and down trips) from 339 to 332 a n d re-issued the said tickets at stage No. 17 (Vinjamur) while performing 05-30 hrs. B.Gudur D/o service on 16.10.92, which constitutes misconduct u/s. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulation 1963. 5. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.5.75 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 2387685 against stage Nos. 17 to 21 (Vinjamur to Chakalikonda – up and down trips) from 339 to 332 and re-issued one of the said tickets at Stage No. 17 (Vinjamur) while performing 05-30 hrs. B.Gudur D/o. service on 16.10.92, which constitutes mis- conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Reg. 1963”. 6. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.7-00 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 3929328 against stage Nos. 1 to 14 from 399 to 389 and re- issued 4 of the above said tickets at stage No. 14 (Kaligiri) in the down journey at 18-00 hrs. while performing 11-30 hrs. B.Gudur N/o service on 28.10.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963.” 7. For having altered the ticket numbers of RS.5-25 den. In the relevant column of SR No. 3987647 against stage Nos. 12 to 1(Kagaletur to Nellore) from 159 to 152 and re-issued the said tickets at Nellore in the up journey while performing 10-15 hrs. Somasila N/o service on 17.10.92, which constitutes misconduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 8. For having altered the ticket number of Rs.20-00 den. From 893 to 890 in the relevant column of SR No. 2458649 against stage Nos. 1 to 38 and re- issued them at Stage No. 38 (Cuddapah) in the d o w n journey while performing 10-00 hrs. Cuddapah D/o service on 1.10.92, which constitutes misconduct u/s. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulation 1963. 9. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.10.00 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 2458649 against stage Nos. 5 to 38 (Butchi to Cuddapah) from 370 to 368 and re-issued the said tickets from Badval in the down journey, while performing 10-00 hrs. Cuddapah D/o. service on 1.10.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Reg. 1963. 10. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.5-50 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 2587215 against the stage Nos. 1 to 17 (Nellore to Vinjamur) from 219 to 216 and re-issued them at Vinjamur in the down journey while performing 19-30 hrs. Vinjamur N/s service on 12.10.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 11. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.6-25 den. In the relevant column of SR No. 2387215 against stage Nos. 26 to 17 (Pamur to Vinijamur) from 891 to 890 and re-issued the said ticket at Vinjamur in the down journey while performing 19- 30 hrs. Vinjamur N/s. service on 26.10.92, which constitutes misconduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 12. For having altered the ticket number of Rs.7-00 den. From 893 to 890 in the relevant column of SR No. 3929100 against stage Nos. 1 to 26 (Nellore to Pamur) from 384 to 382 and re-issued the said tickets at Pamur in the down journey while performing 19-30 hrs. Vinjamur N/s. service on 26.10.92, which constitutes misconduct u/s. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulation 1963. 13. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.4-25 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 2587215 against the stage Nos. 1 to 17 (Nellore to Vinjamur in the up journey) and upto Stage No. 11 (Akarabad) in the down journey from 727 to 723 and reissued the said 5 tickets at Stage No. 11 (Akarabad) and another ticket at stage No. 7 while performing 19-30 hrs. Vinjamur N/s service on 28.9.92, which constitutes mis-conduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 14. For having altered the ticket numbers of Rs.5-25 den. In the relevant column of SR No. 2458282 against stage Nos. 1 to 17 (Nellore to Vinijamur) from 961 to 960 and re-issued it at Vinjamur in the down journey while performing 19-50 hrs. Vinjamur N/s. service on 28.9.92, which constitutes misconduct u/r. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. 15. For having altered the ticket number of Rs.10-00 den. in the relevant column of SR No. 2458282/83 against stage Nos. 1 to 26 (Nellore to Pamur) from 359 to 352 and re-issued the said tickets at Stage No. 26 (Pamur) while performing 19-30 hrs. Vinjamur N/s. service on 28.9.92, which constitutes misconduct u/s. 28(xxiii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulation 1963. It is further pointed out that after providing the necessary opportunities at the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer has concluded his report. In fact the Enquiry Officer has held that four of the charges viz., Charge Nos. 4, 5, 8 and 14 are not established while the rest of the 11 charges are held established. It is therefore pointed out on behalf of the corporation that the Enquiry Officer has given his anxious consideration to the material on record very objectively and then arrived at the conclusions. Alteration of the ticket numbers in the statistical return would instantaneously generate suspicion about the motive behind the alteration. Unfortunately the claim of the writ petitioner that due to bad road conditions, the alterations were required to be made in the statistical return does not appear to be convincing or sound or logical. Statistical returns are provided to the conductor of buses so as to enable them to enter the necessary data therein immediately. It contains the particulars relating to the tickets issued by every conductor and those details are required to be reflected in the relevant columns provided for each denomination of the ticket. Any alterations therefore create a doubt in the mind of any agency as to whether it is an essentially required alteration or it was an alteration attempted to camouflage the recycling of tickets once issued before. The Labour Court upon perusing the material on record as well as the findings of the Enquiry Officer has not found the conclusions contained in the Enquiry Report to be blame worthy. It has hence not found fault with the Enquiry Report. The Enquiry Report is accepted as forming the basis for the punishment. But, at the same time, the Labour Court had found the case to be warranting interference with regard to the quantum of punishment. According to the Labour Court, the punishment of removal from service was too disproportionate and excessive to the proven guilt of the charges. Therefore, it had rightly ordered for the reinstatement of the writ petitioner back into service as a conductor with the benefit of continuity of service. By awarding continuity of service, the Labour Court has ensured that the past service rendered by the writ petitioner to the corporation would not be lost sight of in the matter of granting running increments for counting length of service, for the purposes of seniority/promotion and also for terminal benefits. However, it had not awarded backwages for the period between 6.7.1993, the date of removal till the date of reinstatement i.e., 4.4.1996 inasmuch as the Labour Court had also come to the conclusion that the alterations attempted by the writ petitioner in the statistical returns on 11 different occasions were not really warranted. It has substituted the punishment of removal with that of stoppage of one annual increment, which is only a minor punishment. It is therefore crystal clear that the Labour Court had exercised extreme compassion and sympathy towards the cause of the writ petitioner. It had denied backwages for the interregnum period for approximately three years. When once the misconduct alleged against an employee is held established, punishment is bound to be imposed and so long as such punishments are proportionate or reasonable they do not warrant interference. In the instant case, exercising the discretion available to it under section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Labour Court while awarding the benefit of continuity of service has only denied the writ petitioner the backwages for approximately 33 months period and also imposed the minor punishment of stoppage of one increment. Since a minor punishment is only imposed, even such an increment which has been withheld becomes liable to be released in favour of the writ petitioner as soon as the period of 12 months elapses. In other words, when the next annual grade increment is released, the pay of the employee is bound to be hiked duly releasing the withheld increment also. Thus, it is clear that the compassion exercised by the Labour Court is on fair and proper grounds and it cannot be characterized as either perverse or unjust calling for interference. Hence, the award passed by the Labour Court in ID No. 293 of 1993 on the file of the Labour Court, Guntur, dated 28.5.1995 does not warrant or call for any interference. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. -------------------- knk .07.2009 ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN}