GSRTC Vs. RAMANBHAI K. RATHOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the award dated 12.08.2005 passed by the Industrial Tribunal Ahmedabad in Reference (IT) No. 154/1999 whereby the Tribunal by quashing and setting aside the punishment order directed the petitioner to pay arrears to the respondent workman. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent was working with the/petitioner corporation as a conductor. On 13.02.1993, the respondent was found to have misappropriated some amount by way of tampering with the tickets. The respondent was therefore issued with a charge -sheet and a departmental inquiry was initiated against him. At the conclusion of inquiry, after the charge levelled against him was proved, a punishment of stoppage of one increment with future effect was imposed. The case of the respondent was taken in review and the reviewing authority vide order dated 27.09.1995 enhanced the punishment to stoppage of two increments with future effect. The respondent, therefore, preferred reference before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.

(2.) MR . Rawal, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Tribunal has not considered the fact that the petitioner corporation has incurred huge financial loss due to the misconduct of the respondent workman. He submitted that the respondent is a habitual offender. He submitted that there are 24 defaults committed by the respondent as per the default card and therefore the Tribunal ought to have imposed some punishment instead of totally setting aside the penal order.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through the award of the Tribunal and the evidence available on record. From the award it appears that the Tribunal has committed an error in setting aside the penal orders. The default card of the respondent workman shows 24 defaults on his part which is very serious. Considering 24 defaults on the part of respondent workman, for having a deterrent effect on him, this Court is of the view that the punishment imposed by the reviewing authority is just and proper and the same deserves to be restored. In the premises aforesaid, petition is allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is quashed and set aside. The order dated 27.09.1995 of imposing punishment of stoppage of two increments with future effect passed by the reviewing authority of the petitioner corporation upon the respondent workman is confirmed. This order shall be implemented within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the writ of the order of this court. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted.