RSRTC Vs. TEJ RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved of the order dated 15th November, 1997; declining the application under Sec. 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'Act of 1947'), the petitioner - Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'Corporation'), has instituted the instant writ application challenging the legality, validity and correctness of the order.

(2.) Briefly, the skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised herein are that the respondent -workman -Teja Ram (deceased), was proceeded with for a disciplinary action for he misbehaved with the Manager (Traffic), Alwar Depot, of the petitioner Corporation under intoxication on 4th January, 1994. The respondent -workman was placed under suspension on 4th November, 1994, and was served with a charge sheet for acts and omissions as contemplated under Order 34 of the Standing Orders. On conclusion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Officer returned a finding of guilt against the respondent -workman for having committed nuisance while on duty at the premises of the petitioner Corporation within the ambit of Clause (b) and (h) of the Order 34 of the Standing Orders. The Disciplinary Authority on a consideration of the findings arrived at by the Inquiry Officer on the basis of evidence and materials available on record as well as affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the respondent -workman, inflicted a penalty of removal from service of the Corporation vide order dated 22nd November, 1994. Since, a general reference was pending, an application under Sec. 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947, was moved before the Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal'), for approval of the penalty of removal from service of the Corporation vide order dated 22nd September, 1994.

(3.) The Tribunal on a consideration of the facts and materials available on record, concluded that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was fair and proper. However, on the issue of sufficiency of evidence justifying the penalty inflicted declined the approval on the application under Sec. 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947; of which the petitioner Corporation is aggrieved of.