T JAYARAMULU Vs. LABOUR COURT ANANTAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Labour Court, Anantapur passed the impugned award on 7-6-1988 in I.D.No.20 of 1988 holding that the punishment of removal imposed by the Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Anantapur as a disciplinary measure on the petitioner - workman is justified. Hence this writ petition by the delinquent

(2.) While the petitioner was conducting the bus on 28-10-1981 on the route 'Tadipatri to Simhadripuram', a check was exercised by the officials of the A.P.S.R.T.C. and in that they detected certain cash and ticket irregularities. Spot explanation of the delinquent was obtained and the matter was reported to the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority, not being satisfied with the spot explanation offered by the delinquent, framed five charges. The charges are:

(3.) That the disciplinary authority again not being satisfied with the reply of the petitioner to the above charges, proceeded to hold a departmental enquiry. The Inquiring authority appointed by the Corporation held an enquiry and submitted his report recording the findings that the charges are proved. The disciplinary authority, after consideration of the findings recorded by the Inquiring authority and after taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances, thought it just and proper to impose the penalty of removal from service on the delinquent, and accordingly it passed an order on 7-2-1985 terminating the petitioner from service as a disciplinary measure. The appeal and the review preferred by the petitioner within the administration of the Corporation did not yield any favourable result. Ultimately, an industrial dispute was instituted before the Labour Court. The Labour Court, after re-appraisal of the evidence on record, held that the charges are proved. However, the learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court opined that the charges 1, 4 and 5 are "negligible charges only". Then the learned Presiding Officer examined under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, whether the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority is proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct committed by the delinquent and after such exercise, the learned Judge came to the conclusion that no case was made out to grant any relief to the delinquent. Accordingly, he passed the impugned award.