LexREGIONAL MANAGER UTTARANCHAL RD. TPT. CORPN. versus THAN SINGH & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
' ' [2008] 1 S.C.R. 813 t REGIONAL MANAGER UTTARANCHAL RD. TPT. CORPN. A V. THAN SINGH & ANR. (C.A. No. 471 of 2008) JANUARY 17, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] * UP. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Bus conductor B carrying passengers without issuing tickets though fare collected - Checking staff directing to issue tickets to c passengers and make entries in way Bill - Tickets issued thereafter - Termination of service - Reinstatement by High Court - Held: Not correct - Issuance of tickets on basis of instructions of checking staff cannot legalize the illegality committed by employee - Thus, order of High Court set aside 0 - _Matter remitted back to High Court. Transport inspector carried out checking operation and found that respondent no. 1-bus conductor though collected the fares from 20 passengers traveling in the bus but did not issue tickets nor made entry in way Bill E for 23 passenger.s. The checking staff directed respondent no. 1 to issue tickets to those passengers and on issuance thereof, to make entries in the way bill. Thereafter, on departmental enquiry, service of respondent no.1 was terminated. Tribunal upheld the F termination order. However, High Court holding that tht:! tickets were issued to the passengers but only entries were not made in the bill, directed re-instatement. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to High G -t Court, the Court HELD: Respondent No. 1 employee himself accepted that though he had collected the fare, he had not issued tickets to 20 passengers and had only issued tickets to 813 H 814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 1 S.C.R. A three passengers. The confusion arose because the High -t Court apparently proceeded on the basis that after the tickets were issued only the entries in the way bill were to be recorded. That was not so. Issuance of tickets on the basis of the instructions of the checking staff cannot B legalize the illegality committed by the respondent No. 1. That being so, the approach of the High Court was clearly wrong and the conclusions drawn were contrary to the " materials on record, thus, the impugned order is set aside Jt and the matter is remitted to the High Court. [Para 7] [816- G B, C, D, E] CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 471 · of 2008. From the final Judgment and Order dated 5.10.2005 of D the High Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 690 (M/S) of 2005. ).._ - Sangeeta Kumar for the Appellant. Brij Bhusan for the Respondents. Jo ' E The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Uttranchal High Court allowing F the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred <I. - to as the 'employee'). Challenge before the High Court was to the award dated 27.7.2004 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, and Labour Court Haldwani (in short the 'Tribunal') in Adjudication Case No. 21 of 1995. G 3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: t- Respondent No.1 was appointed as a conductor on 21.11.1989 under the Appellant-Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). On 8/9.9.1990 the appellant H was the conductor in Bus No. UP 78-9254. The Transport REGIONAL MANAGER UTTARANCHAL RD. TPT. 815 CORPN. v. THAN SINGH & ANR. [PASAYAT, J.] i .. Inspector as a part of the checking operation stopped the bus. A There were 48 passengers traveling in the bus and out of them 20 did not have any ticket and there was no entry made in the Way Bill for 23 passengers. The employee made a statement that he could not issue tickets though he had collected the fares from 20 persons. The conductor was made to issue tickets to B passengers to whom tickets had not been issued. The inspector ~ made an entry for closing of ticket issuance and he also directed _. the employee to make an entry in respect of the 23 passengers in the way bill. Proceedings were initiated against the erring employee and his services were terminated on the basis of the c materials collected during departmental enquiry. A reference was made under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 'Act') at the prayer of the respondent. The Tribunal came to hold that the order of termination was legal and justified and the concerned workman was not entit
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.