DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC. Vs. VEERA THIRUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Questioning the legality and validity of the Award dtd. 21/7/2005 passed in I.D.No.86 of 1996 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Godavarikhani, wherein and whereby the Tribunal set aside the removal order of the first Respondent from service and directed the petitioner herein to reinstate the first Respondent into service with continuity of service along with 15% of back wages, the Depot Manager, erstwhile APSRTC (now TSRTC), Karimnagar-I, filed this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The factual matrix that germane for consideration are that the first Respondent worked as conductor in APSRTC, Karimnagar-I depot. On 25/9/1992 while he was conducting bus No.3370 on route Gannerevaram to Vemulawada, a check was exercised by the TTIs at about 11.40 hours at Vemulawada stage No.9 and found some irregularities in issuing tickets to the passengers. Thereupon the following charges were framed:

(3.) Thereafter domestic enquiry was conducted wherein it was revealed that at Nampalli 14 passengers boarded the bus. The first RESPONDENT collected the fare and issued tickets to all the said passengers. Then he suffered with headache and fits. After Nampalli stage, eight passengers, mentioned in Charge No.2 above, boarded the bus but the first Respondent does not know that there were some ticketless passengers till the bus reached Vemulawada. When he was going to ask the passengers for taking tickets the TTIs checked the bus. On that the above irregularities were found and the charges mentioned above were framed against the first Respondent. The first Respondent did not deny the existence of ticketless passengers. After following the due procedure and principles of natural justice, and having found that the charges levelled against the first Respondent were proved, the petitioner issued show cause notice of removal from service to the first Respondent on 15/1/1993. The first Respondent also submitted his explanation to the same. As the charges were proved, the petitioner passed final orders removing the first Respondent from service on 28/1/1993. The appeal and review petitions preferred by the first Respondent were rejected on merits.