DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. SURENDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed an Award dated 7th November, 2003 whereby the industrial adjudicator held that as the respondent's/workman's absence from duty was treated as leave without pay, therefore the same did not amount to misconduct and consequently held the action of the petitioner in imposing punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect upon the respondent/workman was illegal and unjustified by way of the industrial award dated 7th November, 2003.

(2.) Notice of this petition was issued on 7th March, 2005. None put in appearance despite service. On 25th July, 2005, the matter was adjourned in the interest of justice and again on 21st October, 2005 when records of the industrial adjudicator were also called for. The same have been received. There is still no appearance on behalf of the respondent. Accordingly, this writ petition has been taken up for hearing as earlier directed.

(3.) Perusal of the award shows that the industrial tribunal has placed reliance on the evidence to the effect that the unauthorised absence of the workman had been shown to be leave without pay in its records. Therefore, the industrial tribunal had arrived at a conclusion that availing leave without pay is not a misconduct and consequently held that the management had failed to prove any action on the part of the respondent which would have justified imposition of punishment. It was held that the petitioner had therefore failed to prove any misconduct against the workman.