N ARUMUGAM Vs. MANAGEMENT TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. T. Lajapathi Roy, the learned counsel for the appellant on the condone delay petition.

(2.) THERE was an enormous delay in filing the appeal which is 1666 days. However, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to penury and poverty situation and therefore he was not able to file the appeal in tine.

(3.) THE appellant before this Court is a Conductor in the state owned Transport Corporation and he was charge sheeted on the ground of misconduct in not issuing tickets and not accounting the money collected from the passengers. A full fledged enquiry was conducted by the Transport Corporation. After issuing the second show cause notice, the appellant was dismissed from service. THE said second show cause notice was dated 22.2.1995 and the appellant had given a reply on 8/3/1995. THEreafter, considering the reply, the appellant's service was dispensed with. THE argument that there was only 3 days" notice contrary to the standing orders as alleged by the Appellant does not arise on the facts of this Case.