THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 15664 of 2001. ORDER: The petitioner who was a Conductor in APSRTC seeks a writ of certiorari against the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, Godavarikhani in I.D.No. 72 of 1995 dt. 4.8.2000. The petitioner was found to have committed ticketing irregularity and was subjected to disciplinary proceedings by holding a domestic enquiry and on finding that the charges are established, he was removed from service on 2.7.1994. After exhausting the remedies of appeal and review, he raised industrial dispute, which came to be decided by the Industrial Tribunal under the impugned award. Para-6 of the Award states that the petitioner filed a memo stating that quantum of punishment may be examined from the point of view of proportionality u/s 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Tribunal framed a point in that regard and considered the entire evidence on record and came to the conclusion that the misconduct having been proved against the petitioner, the punishment of removal is proportionate to the charges framed. Questioning the said award, this writ petition is filed. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was prejudiced as his counsel did not argue the case before the Industrial Tribunal and that since the ticketing irregularity relates to only a paltry amount, a sympathetic view ought to have been taken by the Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that the discretion under section 11-A of the I.D. Act is not properly exercised by the Tribunal warranting interference of this Court. I have carefully perused the Award of the Tribunal and noticed that the petitioner gave an explanation (Ex:M.7) to the checking officials at the time of check in which the misconduct alleged against him was almost admitted by him. Even otherwise, the statement of a passenger Ex:M.6 also shows that the petitioner admitted about the ticketing irregularity. The statement of the checking official Ex:M.17 was also verified by the Tribunal and in the light of the aforesaid evidence, charges against the petitioner were held proved. It was further found that since the petitioner issued ticket, which was already sold in up- journey, he does not deserve any sympathy. The Industrial Tribunal therefore found that the removal of the petitioner is proportionate. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the findings recorded by the Tribunal, I am unable to persuade myself to take a different view than that of the Tribunal and the discretion exercised by the Industrial Tribunal u/s 11-A of I.D. Act cannot be said to be open for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost. __________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J 25.11.2010. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 15664 of 2001. ORDER: Dt. 25.11.2010.