VASU D MESTHA Vs. KADAMBA TRANSPORT CORPORATION LIMITED BEING AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE, by consent heard both sides forthwith.

(2.) THE petitioner was a Bus Conductor under the first respondent. He was charge-sheeted for misconduct of misappropriation of funds. After disciplinary inquiry an order dated 23rd January, 1996, has been passed by the first respondent demoting him to the post of helper. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. The only point urged by the counsel for the petitioner is that the Order impugned is ex facie illegal as it has been passed demoting him to a lower category which he has never worked in or it is not feeder post for promotion to the post of Bus Conductor. The learned Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, contended that even though the order is found to be prima facie illegal this Court cannot interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as an effective and alternate remedy by way of appeal before the Managing Director, failing which he can also raise an industrial dispute. Secondly, the counsel for the respondents submits that this is a punishment as laid down certain Standing Order No. 2914 and so long as the petitioner did not challenge the Standing Order, he cannot straightway come to this Court for seeking remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. None of the grounds urged by the counsel for the respondents appeal to us as far as the question posed in this case is concerned.