D.T.C. Vs. SALEK CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition emanates from the order dtd. 15/9/2000 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal No. II, Tis Hazari court, Delhi ("Impugned Order -I") and order dtd. 3/10/2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-II, Karkardooma Courts Delhi ("Impugned Order-II"). The Impugned Order-I and Impugned Order-II would collectively be also referred to as Impugned Orders, where so required. The Petitioner hereby is impugning the legality of the aforesaid Impugned Orders and is seeking issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the said Impugned Orders.

(2.) A brief factual matrix shows that the Petitioner filed an Application under Sec. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ("I.D. Act") seeking the approval of the learned Labour Court for terminating the services of the Respondent. Learned Labour Court adjudicated on the issue of validity of the domestic enquiry conducted by the Petitioner/Management and vide Impugned Order-I held that the said domestic enquiry was conducted after following the principles of natural justice and therefore there is no fault in the enquiry proceedings. However, after analyzing the evidence before the enquiry officer, the learned Labour Court held that there was no evidence before the enquiry officer to hold the Respondent guilty of the alleged misconduct. In view of the same, the validity of the enquiry was decided against the Petitioner. Later, vide Impugned Order-II, the learned Labour Court dismissed the application filed by the Petitioner/Management under Sec. 33(2)(b) of the I.D. Act on the ground that there existed no evidence before the enquiry officer to establish misconduct on the part of the Respondent.

(3.) It is an admitted fact that the Respondent was appointed by the Petitioner as a Conductor (Retainer crew) w.e.f. 21/6/1984 on monthly rates of pay and was allotted badge no. 21355. In November, 1991, while the Respondent was performing his duty in bus no. 8993 Route no. 2, an inspection was conducted on the aforesaid bus at about 12:05 hours. During the said inspection, the checking officials of the Petitioner detected irregularity with respect to the ticket collection by the Respondent i.e. re-selling of a pre-sold ticket to a lady passenger. A challan memo was filed on 29/11/1991 containing the alleged episode.