MARUTI DODABASAPP HARIJAN Vs. NWKRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears for petitioner even after it was passed over and called again. Since matter is of year 2010, it is taken up for disposal.

(2.) Perusal of writ petition would indicate that petitioner is challenging award dtd. 3/5/2010 passed by Additional Labour Court, Hubballi in KID no.41/2007. It is stated that petitioner was appointed as conductor in services of respondent-Corporation in year 1985 and had served for more than 22 years. It is stated that on 26/8/1993, petitioner was issued with article of charges that while he was on duty as conductor in a Corporation bus plying from Nippani to Kodni, he had failed to issue tickets to 11 passengers traveling from Nippani (Stage-I) even though bus has reached Kodni (Stage-II) after collecting travel fare of Rs.1.25 paisa each. It was alleged that petitioner had pilfered revenue of Corporation. It is stated that petitioner submitted reply denying charges and contending that he was asked to attend duty of said trip due to absence of another conductor. Departure of bus was delayed by more than 30 minutes, he had begun journey before issuing tickets. While he was in process of issuing tickets, some more passengers had boarded bus at college stop and even before he could complete issuance of tickets, bus was subjected to check at stage-II, which was just 4 k.m. ahead.

(3.) It was stated without taking note of same, checking officer forced ticketless passengers to pay penalty and issued offence memo. It was stated that petitioner had not committed any irregularities as alleged in offence memo and sought dropping of charges. However without proper consideration of facts and circumstances, Corporation had issued articles of charges. It was stated that enquiry officer was appointed on 29/6/1994. But enquiry did not proceed by following principles of natural justice and was concluded only on 22/9/2024. Enquiry officer had erroneously come to a conclusion that charges against petitioner were proved. Even though petitioner had submitted reply to second show-cause notice, disciplinary authority without proper consideration and taking note of prior default history passed order of dismissal. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner had approached Labour Court.