VIRENDER SINGH Vs. LANCER CONVENT SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated December 03, 2014 dismissing the writ petition filed by the Appellant Virender Singh against an award passed by the learned Tribunal awarding him compensation for a sum of Rs. 75,000/- in lieu of reinstatement, back wages and other benefits, Virender Singh prefers the present appeal.

(2.) A brief exposition of the facts is that Virender Singh while working as a driver was challaned under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'the MV Act') by the Delhi Traffic Police while he was driving Bus No.DL 1P-5256 carrying students on September 24, 2007. Pursuant to show cause notice a disciplinary inquiry was conducted. Finding him guilty the Disciplinary Authority proposed to terminate his services. Approval of the Director (Education) under Section 120 (2) of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 (in short 'the DSE Act and Rules') was sought and pursuant thereto Virender Singh was dismissed from services.

(3.) The Labour Court vide its order dated April 03, 2014 decided the preliminary issue and held that the inquiry was conducted in a fair and legal manner following the principles of natural justice. Vide award dated May 09, 2014 the decision of the Management to terminate the service of the workman was also held to be legal and justified in view of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the decision M.C.Mehta vs.Union of India and ors., 1998 1 SCC 676 for the reasons that a driver who has been challaned once for offence of over-speeding/drunken driving and driving dangerously or for offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code cannot be permitted to drive vehicle meant for ferrying students. However, in view of a dispute raised by Virender Singh for general demand and the termination having been directed without approval in violation of Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short 'the ID Act') the termination was held to be illegal and the order of termination was set aside. The learned Labour Court however, keeping in view the violation of the Supreme Court guidelines and other factors held that no directions for reinstatement and back wages could be passed and instead awarded a lump-sum compensation of Rs. 75,000/- in lieu of reinstatement and back wages.