DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of award dated 3.7.2003 whereby the reference made by the Appropriate Government to the Industrial Tribunal was answered against the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to pay full back wages for the period 1.6.2000 to 10.10.2000 to the respondent.

(2.) Briefly the facts are that the respondent No.1 Suresh Kumar was working as conductor with the petitioner. On 7.7.1989, following charge sheet was issued to him:

(3.) An inquiry was conducted into the charges. The defence of the petitioner was that all the passengers who were allegedly found without DTC tickets, were actually the passengers of broken down bus of Haryana Roadways who had purchased the tickets from the bus conductor of Haryana State bus. He had not charged any money from the passengers and way bill numbers of Haryana Roadways were mentioned on his way bill. They were allowed to board the bus at the request of conductor of Haryana Roadways, whose bus had broken down. Haryana Roadways had also written letters to the petitioner about breakdown of bus and some of its passengers boarding the DTC bus. During inquiry, the bus driver deposed that when they started from Dhaulpur, conductor distributed tickets to all passengers. En route, he came across a bus of Haryana Roadways(Delhi Depot) whose tyre had punctured and whose conductor requested the conductor of his bus to allow 6/7 passengers to board the bus, to which the conductor of his bus refused. When the conductor of Haryana Roadways insisted, the conductor of his bus agreed to let them board the bus and recorded the number of tickets and route of his bus on the Way Bill of that conductor. Before Agra they were stopped by the Checking Flying Squad and they checked the bus. They did not accept the tickets of the Haryana Roadways and the Conductor was challened. The checking staff refused to listen to the conductor. The conductor had not taken any money from the passengers of Haryana Roadways bus nor issued any tickets. The inquiry officer, relying upon the statement of inspector and disbelieving the statement of the driver, held that the respondent was guilty of misconduct and observed that ticket numbers and number of bus conductor recorded on the back of the way bill, was done with the intention to mislead. He further observed that in order to lessen the gravity of situation, the conductor seems to have conspired with the Haryana Roadways and letter of the Works Inspector, Haryana Roadways written to the petitioner, could not be accepted. The inquiry officer observed that the letter appeared to have been obtained by challaned employee at his personal level in order to lessen the gravity of matter. Inquiry officer further concluded that in cross examination, the respondent asked questions to the witnesses if he had charged Rs.20 as fare from the passengers and not returnedRs..050 to the passengers, why he was not charged for another charge of not returning the balance and from this question, it was apparent that the respondent admitted his guilt.