AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE Vs. VINUBHAI J GHANCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 9th April, 2002, passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, in Reference (LCA) No. 1164 of 1999, directing reinstatement of the present Respondent without back wages.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the Respondent was in employment of the Petitioner as a Conductor. He was found to be regularly irregular in attending his job. This quality of his was noticed earlier on 16 occasions and minor punishments were inflicted on him. Lastly, during the year 1995-96 he worked only for 165 days, during the year 1996-97 he worked for only 143 days and lastly between 1st April, 1997 to 31st July, 1997, he worked only for six days. Due to this absenteeism, he was served with a charge sheet on 17.9.1997 and then departmentally proceeded against him. In the departmental inquiry, his case was that he was not keeping good health and was suffering from hyper tension, etc., however, in support of his say, he has not produced any medical evidence. At the end of inquiry, he was found guilty of absenteeism and considering his past history of 16 instances of absenteeism and about 124 other misconducts, he was dismissed from service by the Petitioner. The said order of dismissal was challenged before the Labour Court, Ahmedabad. Before the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, the Respondent had forgone his right to challenge the validity and legality of the departmental proceedings and pressed into service the only argument that the punishment was not commensurate with the misconduct. The Labour Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, came to the conclusion that the punishment was disproportionately high for the misconduct alleged and, therefore, directed reinstatement of the Respondent without back wages. It is this order, which is challenged by the employer-Corporation by way of this petition.

(3.) Heard Learned Advocate Mr. Saurabh G. Amin for Petitioner and Mr. Arvind K. Thakur for Respondent.