M. MALLIKA W/O LATE N. MURUGANANTHAM, MALLIGAI ILLAM, BHARTHAI NAGAR, VEDASANDUR POST AND TALUK, DINDIGUL DISTRICT (SUBSTITUTED AS LRS OF THE DECEASED PETITIONER IN M.P(MD)NO.1 OF 2014 Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the award passed by the Labour Court, Trichy dated 31.08.2009, in I.D.No.140 of 2003, in and by which, confirming the dismissal order passed by the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Madurai, the second respondent herein, dated 15.12.2001, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(2.) Though initially, the writ petition was filed by N.Muruganandam-workman challenging the award of the first respondent, during the pendency of the writ petition, he died on 04.04.2014, subsequently, the wife of the deceased workman namely, M.Mallika filed a petition in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 to substitute herself as the petitioner in the place of the deceased and the said petition was allowed by this Court on 17.06.2014.

(3.) The facts, in a nutshell are as follows: The husband of the petitioner was working as conductor in the respondent transport Corporation. While he was on duty, on 30.03.2001, in the bus bearing No.TN-57-N-0905, it is alleged that he misappropriated a sum of Rs.21.75.00 being the dues of ticket fare collected from the passenger travelled from Trichy to Tiruvarur, though actually, the passenger travelled from Thuvakudi to Sengipatti by paying a sum of Rs.5.00 only. It is further stated that when the Checking Inspectors boarded in the bus at Pudukudi for checking purpose, according to the workman, due to crowd of passengers in view of Velankanni, he could not fill up the invoice, the Checking Inspectors permitted him to complete the invoice and thereafter, he handed over the invoice and the tickets. Pursuant to the same, it was found that one passenger out of 63 passengers travelled in the bus was in possession of ticket bearing No.69018 in which a sum of Rs.26.75 was noted as ticket fare whereas in the carbon copy it was noted as Rs.5.00. It is further stated that the deceased petitioner pleaded before them that due to heavy crowd in the bus, the ticket was given to the passenger without noting the correct ticket fare as blank ticket and only after the passenger informed the same, he get it back and filled the fare as Rs. 26.75 in a hurried manner instead of Rs.5.00. Not being satisfied with the explanation offered by the petitioner's husband the Checking Inspectors obtained statement from the passenger and permitted the passenger to get down at Sengipatti and submitted a report to the second respondent. Based on the said report, the second respondent suspended the petitioner's husband from service pending enquiry and initiated disciplinary action against him. It is stated that even though the charges levelled against him were not proved in the domestic enquiry, the second respondent dismissed the petitioner's husband from service. Challenging the said order of dismissal, the petitioner's husband raised an industrial dispute in I.D.No.140 of 2003 before the Labour Court for setting aside the order of dismissal with back-wages and other consequential monetary benefits. The Tribunal, after consideration of materials available on record as well as the arguments advanced by both the parties, by an order dated 31.08.2009 confirmed the order of dismissal passed by the second respondent by dismissing the I.D.No.140 of 2003. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.