DEPOT MANAGER ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION BUS DEPOT KHAMMAM Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT WARANGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation questioning the award passed by the Labour Court, Warangal, in I. D. No. 40 of 1991 dated 7-9-1993. Late S. Malla Reddy was a driver in the service of the A. P. S. R. T. C. While conducting the bus AAS 4116 on 4-4-1989 on the route "Khammam to Vutukuru", an accident occurred between the said R. T. C. Bus and a lorry bearing Registration No. ADM 9576 at 1030 p.m., in the night. Disciplinary action was initiated against the said driver and after following the procedure, punishment of removal was inflicted on him. An Industrial Dispute was raised against the said order. After discussing the evidence elaborately the Labour Court has come to the factual conclusion that the accident was not on account of the said Mall Reddy alone, but the lorry driver also contributed towards the accident and as such there was contributory negligence. In view of the same, it was held that 1/4th of the back wages should be paid by minimizing the sentence in exercise of powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This fact finding recorded by the Labour Court in appreciation of evidence cannot be reappreciated by this Court, as this Court cannot sit in appeal on fact finding decision of the award. As such, I uphold the fact finding of the Labour Court that there was contributory negligence and the invocation of Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and also the direction to pay 1/4th of the back wages from the date of removal till the death of S. Malla Reddy i.e., 19-7-1992, and confirm the same.

(2.) But the Labour Court had exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the APSRTC to employ the son of late S. Malla Reddy. In exercise of its power under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or even under Section 11-A of the Act, the Labour Court is only enjoined to decide with regard to the validity of the disciplinary action and then the quantum of punishment having regard to the incorporation of Section 11-A therein; but in no event the Labour Court can exceed its powers and issue directions which are not empowered under the Act. The Labour Court cannot distribute bounty like this directing the Management to employ one of the legal heirs of the deceased employee-delinquent. Therefore, this part of the order of the Labour Court directing the APSRTC to employ the son of late S. Malla Reddy is set aside as being without jurisdiction. However, I make it clear that if there is Scheme for employment and if that Scheme permits, one of the legal heirs of the deceased Malla Reddy may file an application and if the requirements of that Scheme are satisfied, then the APSRTC may consider but not on account of the order passed by the Labour Court, but only as and when a proper application in that regard is filed conforming to the Circular, Rules etc., as the case may be governing, the situation, 1/4th of the back wages awarded by the Labour Court shall be paid within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(3.) The writ petition is disposed of a above. No order as to costs.