DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to set aside the Award dated 21st March, 2002 passed by the learned Labour Court in ID No. 627/96 directing reinstatement of the respondent workman with continuity of service and full backwages.

(2.) Facts of the present case adumbrated are that the respondent was appointed as a conductor in the petitioner corporation since 10.9.83 and on 31.12.93 while he was on duty on Bus No. DLP-728 he did not issue tickets to 10 passengers after collecting fare from them and hence a charge sheet was issued to him on 19.1.94. Pursuant to the charge sheet, an enquiry was set up by the petitioner wherein the respondent was found guilty of misconduct and based on the findings of the Enquiry Officer, his services were terminated on 30.6.95. Thereafter, the respondent raised an industrial dispute bearing ID No. 627/96 whereby vide order dated 21.3.2002 the termination of the respondent was held to be illegal and was directed to be reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The main issue, the Court is confronted with is that whether the Labour Court was justified in rejecting the application of the petitioner to lead additional evidence to prove the charge of misconduct of the respondent workman, when the petitioner did not seek leave in the written statement filed before the Labour Court to lead additional evidence in the event of the domestic enquiry is held to be vitiated by the Labour Court.