LAWS(RAJ)-2019-1-249

SHIV SINGH TYAGI Vs. JUDGE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

Decided On January 03, 2019
Shiv Singh Tyagi Appellant
V/S
JUDGE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the cross special appeals (writs); one being D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1643/2017 filed by the workman-Shiv Singh Tyagi ('the workman' for short) against the employer- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Limited ('the employer' for short) and another being D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 259/2018 filed by the employer against the workman, arise out of common order dated 23.08.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the same are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) The brief facts culled out for our consideration are that workman was initially appointed as a Conductor in the employer on probation on daily wages basis vide order dated 26.07.1985. The allegation against the workman was that on 07.12.1985 while he was discharging his duties as a Conductor on Nagaur - Jaipur route, the Inspecting Team of the employer during the course of inspection found that he took the money from three passengers but he did not issue tickets to them as a result of which his services were dispensed with vide order dated 10.12.1985. Again the employee was engaged on daily wages basis vide order dated 01.07.1986. Further allegation against the employee was that on 07.10.1986 while he was discharging his duties as a Conductor on Ajmer - Nagaur route, the Inspecting Team of the employer during the course of inspection found that he took the money from three passengers but he did not issue tickets to them as a result of which his services were dispensed with vide order dated 09.10.1986.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of termination, the workman filed reference before the learned Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur, which was dismissed vide award dated 02.04.1998. Against the impugned award the workman preferred writ petition before learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 23.08.2017 set aside the order of removal of workman with consequential benefits and continuity of service. However, the workman was not granted the benefit of any back-wages.