DEPOT MANAGER ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER ADDL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The management of the A.P.S.R.T.C. has filed this writ petition questioning the correctness of the award dated 27/08/1994 made by the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad, the First Respondent herein, in I.D. No. 642 of 1993 directing reinstatement of the second respondent into service and further directing to entrust to the second respondent only such work which he can perform with his hands. This last direction to entrust the work to the second respondent

(2.) Before the Industrial Court, the petitioner Corporation did not choose to lead any evidence nor produce the domestic enquiry papers. Therefore, the learned Presiding Officer after considering the plea of the workman-second respondent coupled with the fact of non production of enquiry papers and total lack of any evidence adduced by the Corporation, made the impugned award.

(3.) Sri. Gangirami Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation would contend that the Industrial Court should have passed the award on merits but the award was passed without looking into the materials on record and solely for the reason of the absence of the learned Counsel representing the Corporation. Further the learned Counsel would contend that in a claim laid by the second respondent-workman under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1927 (for short 'the Act') the Labour Commissioner awarded the compensation for the injuries/disabilities suffered by the second respondent and the second respondent has availed of the same. From that angle also, there was no justification for the Industrial Court to pass the impugned award directing reinstatement with full back-wages. These are the only two grounds advanced on behalf of the Petitioner-Corporation.