STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SYED AMIR SYED CHHOTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner, the State of Maharashtra, challenges by way of this Writ Petition, the order dated 30/9/1982 of the Labour Court in the Complaint (ULP) No: 109/1982 and the order dated 8/6/1987 of Industrial Court, Aurangabad, directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent-complainant with continuity of service and back wages.

(2.) THE respondent/original complainant was in service of the petitioner as a Driver since 1977 and was, at the material point of time, under the C/o the Jayakwadi quality Control, Gevrai. On 15/6/1982 it is alleged that the respondent/complainant was under an influence of alcohol and behaved improperly in the public place. THE respondent-complainant was, therefore, prosecuted for the offences under section 110 and 117 of the Bombay Police Act as well as section 510 of the Indian Penal Code, in Summary Case No.293/1982 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gevrai. THE respondent-complainant pleaded guilty to the charge and by an order dated 9/7/1982 he was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10/-, in default, simple imprisonment for three days by the learned Judicial Magistrate. Because of this conviction, the respondent-complainant came to be terminated with effect from 20/10/1982 under the provisions of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1979 by the petitioner. THE respondent-complainant, then, challenged the said order of termination by filing Complaint (ULP) No: 109/1982 before the Labour Court and on consideration of evidence on record, the Labour Court by an order dated 30/9/1982 held the termination illegal and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent/complainant with back wages. THE petitioner took up the matter to the Industrial Court in Revision Petition No: 121/1986 which came to be dismissed on 8/6/1987. It is against these orders that the petitioner has approached this Court by present Writ Petition.

(3.) IN the result, the Writ Petition stands dismissed and Rule stands discharged, with no order as to costs. Petition dismissed.