D.T.C. Vs. PREM NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner assails the award dated 13.07.2000 passed by Sh. O.P. Gupta, Presiding Officer, Labour Court IX, Tis Hazari Courts, Dellhi in ID No.184/89, 96/95. The said claim arose out of a reference made by the Government vide Notification No.F.24(904)/89-Lab./8359-64 dated 10.03.1989, terms whereof read as follows:

(2.) The original respondent/workman Prem Nath filed his statement of claim, wherein he claimed that he was appointed as Driver on daily wages w.e.f. 08.08.1984. He was brought on monthly rate of pay vide office order dated 01.05.1985. After expiry of more than one year, the management extended his probation vide letter dated 13.08.1986.

(3.) The case of the respondent/workman was that his services were terminated vide communication dated 02.02.1987 and claimed that the same was punitive. The respondent claimed that a charge sheet was issued to him on 01.09.1986, alleging that on 29.07.1986 while performing duty on Bus No.8490 he parked the same wrongly at Jheel and misbehaved with the supervisor on duty and thereby committed an act of insubordination and disobedience. The respondent claimed that he had submitted his reply to the said charge sheet. However, this enquiry was not taken any further and the termination letter was issued by placing reliance on clause 9(a)(i) of the Delhi Road Transport Authority (Conditions of Appointment and Services) Regulations, 1952. The respondent claimed that no enquiry was held and the charge sheet which was made the foundation for passing the impugned order dated 02.02.1987. Consequently, it was claimed that the order of termination was in violation of section 25F, G, H of the Industrial Disputes Act.