IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13444 of 1999 Between: The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Bus Depot, Bhadrachalam, Khammam Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 R. Hussain, A.P.S.R.T.C., Bhadrachalam Depot., C/o. S. Venkateswar Rao, Advocate, Hanamkonda Dist. Warangal. 2 The Labour Court, Warangal repby its Presiding Officer. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue any appropriate writ, direction or order particularly a writ in the nature of a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the Award in I.D.No.43/95 of the Indl.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal dt.15.7.98 and published on 28.10.1998 and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and pass all such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MRKSRINIVAS RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the award made in I.D.No.43 of 1995 dated 15.7.1998 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Warangal, wherein the reference made under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was answered in favour of workman and the order imposing punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect dated 4.12.1986 was set aside and directed the management to pay arrears arising out of such order including other attendant benefits by postponing only one annual increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect. Petitioner is management and first respondent is workman. It appears, first respondent was working as Driver and while he was on duty, the Bus met with an accident on 31.10.1985. A charge sheet was issued to the first respondent and after conducting a detailed enquiry into the charges, vide order dated 4.12.1986 first respondent was imposed with punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect, apart from ordering recovery of an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards damages caused to the Bus. Being aggrieved by the same, workman carried the matter in appeal, but the appellate authority confirmed the said order. Ultimately, the said dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal under Section 10(1)(c) of the I.D. Act for adjudication of the following issue: “Whether the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bhadrachalam is justified in imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment of Sri R.Hussain,S.No.9636, Driver for a period of two years with cumulative effect besides recovery of amount of Rs.1,000/- in ten equal instalments from his salary towards cost of damages caused to the bus and treating the period of suspension as not on duty?” The Labour Court, after detailed consideration of the entire material placed before it, came to the conclusion that though the enquiry conducted by the management was valid and the charges are proved, punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect, apart from recovering Rs1,000/- towards damages is highly disproportionate to that of the misconduct alleged, therefore, modified the punishment to that of stoppage of one annual increment without cumulative effect besides payment of Rs.1,000/- towards damages caused to the bus. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to interfere with the discretionary order passed by the Labour Court while exercising its power under Section 11-A of the I.D. Act. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 3.4.2008 DA THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.13444 of 1999 3.4.2008