CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER Vs. S. GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation('BMTC' for short) has challenged order dated 22.03.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in W.P.No.517/2010.

(2.) Heard Shri Hareesh Bhandary T., learned advocate for the appellant and Shri R.Somasundar Rao, learned advocate for the respondent.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are, whilst respondent was working as a driver with BMTC in Depot No.12, he was placed under suspension. On 22.11.2000, his suspension order was revoked. Respondent did not report for duty after revocation of suspension. The Depot Manager reported unauthorized absence. Accordingly, BMTC issued a call notice on 21.09.2001. Yet, respondent did not report for duty. The Disciplinary Authority framed and sent imputation of charges on 25.09.2001 by registered post. The respondent did not respond to the charge sheet. A domestic enquiry was conducted after serving a notice through the Security Department of BMTC. A public notice was also given on 18.06.2002, calling upon the respondent to appear before the Enquiry Officer. Since respondent did not appear, the Enquiry Officer proceeded ex parte and submitted his report, holding the charges as proved. The Disciplinary Authority dismissed the respondent by order dated 31.05.2003. Feeling aggrieved, respondent raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Upon failure of conciliation proceedings, reference was made to III Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru, under Section 10(1)(C) of the Industrial Disputes Act ('the Act' for short). The Labour Court framed an issue whether domestic enquiry was conducted in just and fair manner and answered in the negative. Both Management and respondent let in their evidence. The Labour Court on appreciation of evidence on record, rejected the reference. Feeling aggrieved, respondent filed the instant writ petition before this Court. The Hon'ble Single Judge, by the impugned order, has allowed the writ petition, set aside the order of dismissal and directed respondent's reinstatement with continuity of service and all consequential benefits together with 25% back wages. Hence, this writ appeal.