LAWS(APH)-1959-8-17

CHITTOOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE COMPANY Vs. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

Decided On August 28, 1959
CHITTOOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE COMPANY Appellant
V/S
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing an award of the Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad, dated 4 October 1957. The petitioner is the management of the Chittoor Public Transport Service Company, Chittoor. On 10 April 1956, it dismissed one M. Krishnamurthi, an employee in its service. A number of fellow-workers took up the cause of the dismissed employee and demanded his reinstatement. Upon the refusal of the petitioner to reinstate him the matter was taken before the Government who referred the dispute for adjudication to the industrial tribunal. The tribunal found that there was deliberate disobedience by the workman of an order issued by the management but being of the opinion that order of dismissal was unnecessarily "harsh and unjustified," directed reinstatement of the employee, "with continuity of service but without payment of back wages. "

(2.) IT is argued for the petitioner that once it is found that there was misconduct on the part of an employee, it is not open to the tribunal to substitute its own punishment in lieu of the punishment actually Inflicted by the management. Reliance is placed by learned Counsel on the following passage in Indian Iron and Steel Company v. their workmen 1958-I L. L. J. 260 at 269-270 where their lordships of the Supreme Court observed as follows:

(3.) BUT it is contended by Mr. Venkata Subba Rao for the workmen that the finding of the industrial tribunal that there was deliberate disobedience of the order of the management is perverse and opposed to the evidence on record and that in the circumstances the order directing the reinstatement of the worker should stand. There is, it must be conceded, some force in this contention. There is nothing in the order of the industrial tribunal to indicate that its finding that Krishnamurti was guilty of deliberate disobedience is based upon the evidence before it. The charge of management against Krishnamurthi was that in spite of the circular issued by it to all its workers a circular which was in force for more than two years, that they should not carry on the company's stage-carriages any person free of charge, Krishnamurthi carried seven passengers free of charge on 1 April 1956. Krishnamurthi contended that he was not aware of the circular that some of these free passengers were inducted by an inspector of the company at Chittoor who was his superior and that the other three were policemen and that they persisted in occupying the seats in spite of his protest. The management conducted an enquiry which, it is stated, lasted about ten days and ultimately decided to dismiss Krishnamurti. After stating the contentions of the parties before it, the tribunal straightaway observed as follows: