MANAGEMENT OF TAMIL NADU STATE Vs. P KUMARASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "the 1st respondent was originally appointed as a Conductor in the Petitioner Management and later he was promoted as a Cashier. While so, the 1st respondent collected a sum of Rs. 23,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- on 3. 8. 1998 and 20. 8. 1998 respectively from various Depots, but failed to deposit the said amounts with the Bank within 24 Hours. The said lapses were found on a audit conducted on 13. 11. 1998 and immediately, on the same day, explanation was called for from the 1st respondent and on 14. 11. 1998, the 1st respondent remitted the entire amount. Considering the fact that the said lapse is of serious nature, the 1st respondent was placed under suspension on 16. 11. 1998 by the Petitioner Management and charges were issued on 23. 11. 1998 stating that belatedly depositing the amounts collected is in violation of Clause 16 (c) of the Standing Orders. The 1st respondent was afforded an opportunity to submit his explanation, which was also submitted by him and thereafter, an enquiry officer was appointed, who after conducting enquiry, submitted his report on 14. 12. 1998 and on 15. 12. 1998, the Petitioner issued a second show cause notice, calling upon the 1st respondent to give his explanation and the first respondent also submitted his explanation dated 22. 12. 1998 and thereafter, an order of dismissal from service was passed by the Petitioner on 30. 1. 1999. The 1st respondent has filed ID. No. 525/1999 before the 2nd respondent/labour Court, Coimbatore, which passed an award dated 9. 4. 2003, setting aside the order of dismissal of the 1st respondent and directing the Petitioner to reinstate the 1st respondent with continuity of service and without back wages. As against the said award, the Management of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Udhagamandalam has filed this Writ Petition. "

(2.) THE learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that admittedly the Petitioner has committed the act of temporary misappropriation, which is in violation of Clause 16 (c) of the Standing Orders. The Petitioner has appointed an enquiry officer and in the enquiry conducted the 1st respondent also participated and thereafter, the enquiry officer submitted his report, stating that the charges leveled against the 1st respondent were proved and the 2nd show cause notice was also issued and the 1st respondent also sent a reply and thereafter, considering the evidence, the Petitioner has rightly passed an order of dismissal on 30. 1. 1999.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the Petitioner relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2000-7-SCC-517 (Janatha Bazar (South Kanara Central Cooperative Whole Sale Stores Limited and others Vs. Secretary, Sahakari Noukarara Sangha and others), wherein it was held as under:-