AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE Vs. RAMESHCHANDRA GIRDHARLAL RAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service (hereinafter referred to as "AMTS") against the judgement and award of the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in Reference (IT) No.137 of 1992 dated 22.6.2001 whereby the learned Member of the Industrial Tribunal has quashed and set aside the order passed by the petitioner, AMTS dated 14.5.1991 whereby the respondent workman was taken in service treating him to have joined afresh. The learned Member has substituted the punishment by stoppage of five increments with future effect. The learned Member also ordered that the period from 11.2.1991 to 14.2.1991 be treated as on duty, but no wages shall be allowed for the same.

(2.) The facts of the present case are that the respondent workman who had joined services of the petitioner, AMTS in the year 1962 was found to have indulged in irregularities on 12.1.1990. It was was found that he was carrying in his leather bag 'used tickets' of various denominations, totalling to Rs.16.70 and his cash was also found to be in excess by Rs.32.70. Having held departmental inquiry, the authorities passed an order of dismissal on 11.2.1991. The respondent workman filed an appeal before the appellate committee. The appellate committee after taking into consideration various aspects of the matter including the length of service, i.e. from 1962 to the date of incident, substituted the order of dismissal by an order of reinstatement in service as a fresh appointee and that the workman will be paid the lowest of the pay scale.

(3.) Being aggrieved of the order of the appellate committee, the respondent workman approached the Industrial Tribunal by present proceedings. The learned Member of the Tribunal after hearing both the sides exercised his discretion conferred under section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said exercise is undertaken by the learned Member without taking into consideration two judgements of the Honourable the Apex Court, viz. (i) in the matter between Janatha Bazar (South Kanara Central Cooperative Wholesale Stores Ltd.) and others v. Secretary, Sahkari Noukarara Sangha and others, reported in (2000) 7 SCC 517, wherein the Honorable the Apex Court has held in terms that the Labour Court cannot substitute the penalty imposed by the employer in cases of misconduct wherein the employer has exercised its discretion on proved misconduct in domestic inquiry. Learned advocate Mr.Munshaw relied upon para 6 of the judgement which reads as under :