KRISHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff -appellant has preferred the present second appeal against the judgment of reversal dated 31.08.1992 passed by the District Judge, Rohtak, whereby appeal filed by the defendants -respondents against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.1991 passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Rohtak, has been allowed and the suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration has been dismissed. Facts necessary for disposal of the present second appeal are that plaintiff -appellant being regular and permanent employee of Haryana Roadways was posted as conductor with defendant No. 3. On 25.09.1979, when the plaintiff was on duty on a bus started from Delhi to Bathinda via Sirsa, due to overloading of passengers he was not able to issue tickets to all the passengers from its starting point and started issuing tickets on the way from the front gate of the bus. In the meantime a ticket checker boarded the said bus from rear gate and started checking the tickets of the passengers. The said ticket checker, in order to help the conductor (plaintiff -appellant), collected fare amounting to Rs. 7.35 paise from seven passengers, who were to alight the bus at village Sahuwala. He gave the said amount to the conductor (plaintiff) on the pretext of issuing tickets to the said passengers. The plaintiff -appellant gave punched tickets with request to the ticket checker to hand over the same to the passengers, from whom he had collected the fare. The said ticket checker namely Phool Singh again collected a fare of Rs. 5.25 paise from another three passengers who were to alight the bus at village Paniwala. Plaintiff -appellant again issued punched tickets and handed over the same to the checker for giving the same to those passengers. Thereafter Phool Singh, Inspector got down from the bus after sometime and submitted a false report to defendant No. 3 -General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Rohtak Depot regarding misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 12.60 paise against the plaintiff -appellant. On the basis of the aforesaid report, a show cause notice was issued to the plaintiff and an enquiry was held. It was further submitted that after conclusion of the aforesaid enquiry, plaintiff -appellant was held guilty of embezzling a sum of Rs. 12.60 paise. On the basis of the above enquiry report, another show cause notice was given to the plaintiff asking him as to why his services should not be terminated, to which plaintiff submitted his reply, but finding his reply to be unsatisfactory, his services were terminated vide order dated 10.12.1980. As per plaintiff -appellant, the order dated 10.12.1980 terminating his service was illegal, null, void and without any evidence.

(2.) Upon notice defendants filed their written statement stating therein that Phool Singh, Inspector, checked the bus in question on which plaintiff -appellant was posted as conductor and found that ten passengers who were to get down at village Sahuwala and Paniwala were without tickets despite payments of fare of Rs. 7.35 paise and Rs. 5.25 paise respectively. The plaintiff -appellant had embezzled a sum of Rs. 12.60 paise by not issuing tickets despite having received aforesaid amount from those ten passengers. On the basis of the report submitted by the Phool Singh, Inspector, plaintiff was found guilty of embezzlement in an enquiry conducted against him by the department and vide order dated 10.12.1980 his services were terminated. It was further submitted that plaintiffs case was also referred for arbitration under the Industrial Dispute Act, which was also dismissed.

(3.) Replication was filed wherein the entire contents of the plaint were reiterated and those of the written statement filed on behalf of the defendants were denied.