ROOP CHAND Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the award dated 09.09.2005 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in ID No.218/2001.

(2.) The case of the petitioner workman as disclosed in the writ petition is that the petitioner workman was employed with the respondent corporation as a driver since 1981 and was lastly posted in Okhla Depot. He was served with the charge-sheet dated 24.09.1996 alleging that he remained unauthorizedly absent from 01.05.1996 till 14.09.1996 for 79 days which showed lack of interest in the work of corporation and the act of the petitioner workman tantamount to misconduct within the meaning of paragraph 4(1) and paragraph 19(f), (h) and (m) of the Standing Orders governing the conduct of DTC employees. The petitioner denied the allegations made in the chargesheet by way of his reply dated 18.10.1996 wherein it was stated that the leave was taken due to his own illness and illness of his wife, who ultimately died. He had duly informed the depot authorities by way of applications duly supported by the medical certificates.

(3.) Mr K.C. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner workman assailed the enquiry proceedings and the findings of the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that enquiry proceedings were in contravention of various instructions/circulars issued by the corporation from time to time and also in gross violation of principles of natural justice. It was submitted that the petitioner workman was handed over a vague charge-sheet which was in contravention of Executive Instructions on procedure regarding disciplinary action and appeals bearing no. ADMI 3 (18)/53 dated 05.08.1955. Moreover, petitioner workman was neither given the list of witnesses nor the list of documents which is in gross contravention of the DTC's Circular dated 28.05.1980 which mandates supply of list of documents and list of witnesses.