LexNORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN. versus H.H. PUJAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 10 S.C.R. 1149 NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN. V. H.H. PUJAR (Civil Appeal No.4520 of 2008) JULY 18, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] Labour Laws - Dismissal from service - Of bus conduc- A B tor - For the misconduct of not issuing tickets to some pas- c sengers - Labour court as well as High Court setting aside order of dismissal on the ground that ticket-less passengers were not examined - On appeal, held: Order of dismissal jus- tified - Non-examination of passengers is inconsequential in view of the facts that proceedings of domestic enquiry were 0 y fair and that the conductor admitted having not issued the tick- ets - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - s. 10 (4-A). The bus, on which the respondent-conductor was commissioning, was intercepted by the checking staff. It was fond that the respondent had not issued tickets to E 20 out .of 136 passengers. In domestic _enquiry he was found guilty and consequently dismissed from service. Labour Court though held that the domestic enquiry was fair, set aside the order of dismissal and direct his rein- • statement with conformity of service and back wages, on F the ground that cash bag of the respondent and the ticket- less passengers were not checked. Single Judge of High Court confirmed the order except the direction for pay- ment of back wages. Writ appeal was dismissed as not ,, maintainable. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: Since fairness of the proceedings was con- ceded and the respondent admitted that he had not is- G 1149 H 1150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 10 S.C.R. A sued tickets to 20 passengers, non-examination of the passengers is really of no consequence·. The order of dis- missal passed by the Corporation is to operate. [Paras 9 and 10] [1153-E,F & G] State of Haryana and Anr v. Rattan Singh 1977 (2) SCC B. 491; Divisional Controller KSRTC (NWKSRTC) v. A. T Mane 2004 (8) S~ALE 308- relied on . . .. Case Law Reference 1977 (2) SCC 491 Relied on Para 7 C· 2004 (8) SCALE 308 Relied on Para 8 CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4520 of.2008. 0 From the final Order and Judgment dated 21.10.2005 and 21.6.2006 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in W.P. No. 17519/2000 (L-KSRTC) and W.A. No. 3830/2005 (L- KSRTC) respec!ively R.S. Hegde, Chandra Prakash, J.K. Nayyar., Ashwani Garg,_ E Rahul Tyagi and P.P. Singh for the Appellant. }he Judgmentofthe Court was delivered by · Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. ·challenge in this appeal·is to the judgment of a Division F Bench of the Karnataka High Court in the writ appeal no.3830/ ~ G 2005 dismissing appeal against the order of learned Sing!e Judge in Writ Petition No.17519/2000. The writ appeal was dismissed as not maintainable and, therefore, the challenge in the present is essential to the order of learned Single Judge. 3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: Respondent-Conductor was commissioning as such in Bus No. F-16 on 15.9.1993 when the bus was intercepted by the checking staff. It was found that the respondent had not issued H tickets to 20 out of 136 passengers. Appellant conducted do- NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT 1151 ~ CORPN. v. H.H. PUJAR [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] mestic enquiry which found him guilty. Consequently, he was ·A dismissed from service vide order dated 3.4.1995. The same was challenged by the respondent before the Labour Court in- voking Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 194 7 (in , short the 'Act'). The Labour Court held that the domestic in- -r quiry was fair and proper on the basis of the memorandum filed B by the respondent conceding to the fairness of the domestic inquiry. However, the Labour Court set aside the order of dis- missal and directed reinstatement of respondent with full back wages, continuity of service and other consequential benefits. The basis for this order was non-checking of cash bag of the respondent and non-examination of ticketless passengers. The c order was challenged before the High Court. By order dated 21.10.2005, the learned Single Judge held that the order was correct so far as setting aside dismissal order is concerned, ;k direction for reinstatement and continuity of service and conse- quential benefits. However, the direction relating to back wages D was set aside. The writ appeal as noted above, was dismissed on the ground that the same was not
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.