J T DHADHAL Vs. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V.M.SAHAI We have heard Mr J.S. Brahmbhatt, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Archana M Patel holding the brief of Mr Hardik C Rawal, learned counsel for the respondent. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 10.5.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the award of the Industrial Tribunal (for short, "the Tribunal") dated 11.12.2006 in Reference (IT) No.371 of 2002 was upheld.

(2.) THE brief facts are that the appellant was working as Conductor with the respondent Corporation. He was working at Deesa depot of Palanpur division. On 4.10.1995, he boarded the bus which was plied by the respondent from Ahmedabad to Palanpur and he was sitting in the bus as a staff as he was to resume his duty at Deesa. THE driver of the bus was Kishoresinh P. Vihol and the conductor of the bus was P B Makwana. While the bus was going towards Palanpur, Mr Makwana fell ill and he required medical treatment. THErefore, he made a request to the appellant that he may conduct the bus. Accepting the request of Mr P B Makwana, the appellant conducted the bus. THE bus was checked at Deesa Depot by Checking Inspector, however, no irregularities were found except that instead of Mr Makwana, the bus was conducted by the appellant. On this basis, charge sheet was issued on 19.10.1995 to the appellant. Reply was submitted by the appellant to the charge sheet on 06.12.1995 and thereafter departmental disciplinary proceedings were held. On the basis of the inquiry report, the punishing authority passed the order of punishment on 3.1.1996 withholding one year increment with permanent effect.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has urged that without the prior permission of the Corporation no one could conduct the bus on a particular route and in absence of prior permission, the punishing authority took a liberal view by imposing stoppage of one year increment with permanent effect.