BILORI Vs. DTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant joined as Conductor with the Delhi Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as DTC.) in 1983. The appellant was served with a charge sheet alleging that while he was on duty on 4.10.1988 on bus No. 9467 plying from Delhi to Ballabhgarh, there was a checking and it was found that he had not issued tickets to a group of passengers who were traveling from old Faridabad to Ballabhgarh after taking Rs.4.50 from them. It was alleged that the appellant admitted his fault and issued three unpunched tickets No. 25 -27518 to 25 -27520 of Rs. 1.50 Paise each. It was also alleged that the statements of the passengers were recorded by the checking staff but the Conductor declined to counter sign the same. Thus the appellant alleged to have committed irregularities which amount to misconduct within the meaning of para 2(II) and 19(b)(f)(h) & (m) of the standing orders governing the conduct of DTC employees. The enquiry officer gave his finding against the appellant and thereafter he was served with the show cause notice and his services were terminated w.e.f. 5.5.1989.

(2.) AT the time of removal of the appellant from service, DTC workers. demand for implementation of IVth Pay Commission's report was pending adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal and therefore the respondent filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the Act.) for approval of the Industrial Tribunal for its decision for removal of the appellant from service. The Industrial Tribunal vide its order dated 20.1.2000 passed in O.P. No. 36/89 granted approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act for removal of the appellant from service. The appellant thereafter raised an industrial dispute which came to be referred for adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal II vide Reference No. F. 24(4713)/2000 - Lab./3138 -42 dated 6.2.2001. The terms of reference were to the following effect:

(3.) AFTER considering the evidence led by the parties, the Tribunal held that the punishment imposed upon the appellant by the management vide order dated 5.5.1989 is not illegal and unjustified and the he is not entitled for any relief. The reasoning given by the Tribunal is rather cryptic and reads as follows: