STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. CHARAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE of Punjab has approached this Court impugning the Award dated 03.09.1990 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, UT, Chandigarh, vide which respondent No. 1 -workman has been reinstated in service with continuity thereof and has been held entitled to back wages @ 50%. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that respondent No. 1 -workman was working as a Conductor with the Punjab Roadways when on 23.04.1977, checking of the bus was conducted near Bassi, Mata Gujri College at a distance of 3/4 kilometres from Bassi Pathana. About 14 students were travelling by the bus. The students jumped from the bus and ran away before the checking staff checked their tickets. On this assumption, it so happened that the inspecting staff proceeded to believe that money had been charged by respondent No. 1 -workman and no tickets have been issued to them. The stand of respondent No. 1 -workman was that they being students were carrying their passes, which explanation was not accepted by the checking staff and accordingly, a report was submitted against him for embezzlement of Rs. 5.20P, the value of the tickets, which were not issued to the students. After an enquiry, respondent No. 1 -workman was terminated from service. He, on this basis, contends that the findings recorded by the Labour Court cannot be said to be correct especially when, there was no reason for the students to have run away had they been carrying passes. The obvious conclusion has been drawn by the inspecting staff and the management that the workman -respondent No. 1 did not issue the tickets to the students and in fact, took cash from them. He, however, could not support the said assertion when confronted with the fact that the cash in the cash bag of the workman or the cash on person of the workman was not checked by the inspecting staff.

(2.) IN the light of the above, when the cash in the cash bag and cash on person of the workman was not checked by the inspecting staff, it cannot be believed as to how the inspecting staff had come to a conclusion that the workman -respondent No. 1 has taken money from the students and not issued the tickets and has embezzled the same. On the contrary, if the students would have given money for the tickets, they would have so told to the inspecting staff and would not have moved of from the bus. However, no corroborative evidence has been produced before the trial Court, which would support the assertions made against the workman by the petitioner -Management.