LAWS(MAD)-2020-10-440

GENERAL MANAGER TAMIL NADU STATE CORPORATION (VILLUPURAM) LIMITED Vs. R. CHANDRASEKARAN CONDUCTOR EMP NO CR61169, STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION

Decided On October 05, 2020
General Manager Tamil Nadu State Corporation (Villupuram) Limited Appellant
V/S
R. Chandrasekaran Conductor Emp No Cr61169, State Transport Corporation Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order dated 29.09.2016 passed by the Principal Labour Court, Chennai in I.D.No.230 of 2014 and to quash the same.

(2.) The respondent was working as a Conductor in the petitioner/Transport Corporation. While so, on 14.02.2007, when he was in duty in the bus plying in the route from Chennai to Pondicherry, at Anumanthai Bus S, a checking squad entered into the bus. During checking, it was found that the respondent/employee collected a ticket fare of Rs.110/- from two passengers who traveled from Chennai to Pondicherry, but has not issued tickets to the passengers and attempted to misappropriate the ticket fare collected from the passengers. This was recorded by the Inspection Team and accordingly, a disciplinary proceedings was initiated against the respondent, whereas, the charge sheet dated 19.02.2007 was served on the respondent and the respondent also participated in the domestic enquiry conducted in this regard. After conducting domestic enquiry, a second show cause notice was given on 24.02.2009 to the respondent, for which, an explanation seems to have been given by the respondent and ultimately, the petitioner was not satisfied with the explanation given by the respondent. Thereafter, the writ petitioner, who is the Disciplinary Authority, has inflicted the punishment by passing an order dated 15/05/2010, whereby dismissed the respondent from service.

(3.) As against the said order of dismissal dated 15.05.2010, the respondent raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No.230 of 2014 on the file of the Principal Labour Court, Chennai. The Labour Court, after hearing both sides on the preliminary issue, raised a question as to whether the domestic enquiry was conducted fairly and properly. Ultimately, it was decided in favour of the employer (i.e.,) petitioner herein by order dated 29.09.2016. Insofar as the issue raised in the Industrial Dispute on the merits is concerned, the Labour Court after appreciating both sides contention and evidence, has come to the conclusion that the respondent is deserved to be punished. However, insofar as the proportionality of the punishment is concerned, the Labour Court was of the opinion that, the punishment of dismissal from service is disproportionate and accordingly, the Labour Court modified the punishment into withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect. In the result, the Industrial Dispute was allowed in part, where the punishment of dismissal from service inflicted against the respondent was set aside and it was modified to withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect and further, directed the employer to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service with 50% backwages. Aggrieved over the above order passed by the Labour Court, dated 29.09.2016, the Management filed this petition with aforesaid prayer assailing the said impugned award.