THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC versus B. SWAMY

Citation: [2007] 4 S.C.R. 764 · Decided: 03-04-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. SINGH, P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

1. 
A 
TIIE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC 
~ 
v. 
B.SWAMY 
APRIL 03, 2007 
B 
[B.P. SINGH AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANY AN, JJ.] 
""" 
Service Law 
,.. 
c 
Dismissal-Bus conductor-Found guilty of issuing tickets of lower 
· denomination than the actual fare to I 6 illiterate female passengers-
Dismissed from service-Labour Court holding misconduct as proved and 
justifying removal-High Court holding the punishment as of excess gravity 
and terming the incident as accidental and solitary in long career of employee, 
directing his fresh appointment-Held: Mere fact that this was first occassion 
D when the respondent was caught, is no ground to hold that it was accidental-
A Conductor of a bus enjoys faith reposed in him-He performs only duty of 
issuing tickets to passengers and accounting for fare collected from passengers 
·r 
to management-If he is dishonest in performance of his duties, he is guilty 
.., 
of serious misconduct_ and gravity of misconduct cannot be minimized by the 
E 
fact that he was not earlier caught indulging in such dishonest conduct-
Even one act of dishonesty amounting to breach of faith may invite serious 
punishment-There was no justification for interfering with order of 
management which had been upheld by the Labour Court-Judgment of 
Division Bench of High Court set aside and order of single Judge of High 
. Court restored-Labour Laws. 
F 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1766 of2007. 
....,. 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 30.08.2005 of the High Court 
of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in, Writ Appeal No. 1484 of 
2005. 
G 
A.V. Rao, Sateesh Galla, Prabhakar Pamam, Venkateswara Rao Anumolu, 
R. Santhan krishnan, K. Radha Rani, PravP-en K. Pandey, P. Vijaya Kumar, C. 
Tulasi Krishna and D. Mahesh Babu for the appearing parties. 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
~ 
H 
764 
DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC v. B. SW AMY 
765 
ORDER 
A 
Special Leave granted. 
It is not in dispute that on 23rd May, 2000 the respondent was a 
conductor performing his duties as Conductor in the bus belonging to 
APSRTC. When the vehicle was checked, it was detected that 16 illiterate lady B 
passengers had been issued tickets of 0.50 paise denomination instead of 
Rs.4/-. The respondent is alleged to have collected an extra amount from each 
of them which he pocketed. The checking staff had recorded the statement 
of the passengers whereafter a charge memo was issued to the respondent. 
After holding an inquiry, the management removed the respondent from C 
service. 
The respondent moved the Labour Court under Section 2A(2) of the 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for setting aside the order of removal from 
service passed by the Management. The Labour Court on a perusal of the 
evidence ~m record concluded that 16 lady passengers had in fact been given D 
tickets oflower denomination of 0.50 paise each instead of Rs.4/-. Had there 
been no checking of the vehicle, the respondent would have pocketed 
Rs.52/- without being detected. It did not find any substance in the submission 
of the respondent., that since the bus was over loaded he had issued those 
tickets under a mistake. Negativing the contention of the respondent, the 
Labour Court held that the management having reposed confidence in the E 
respondent as a conductor, since it found that he was not performing his 
duties with honesty and sincerity, it was justified in removing him from 
service. If such acts on the part of conductors are condoned, the ultimate 
sufferer will be the APSRTC. 
The Labour Court also took into account the fact that this could not F 
be an accidental slip in issuing tickets of lower denomination because such 
tickets were not issued to one or two passengers but to as many as 16 
passengers. Considering all aspects of the matter, the Labour Court held that 
the misconduct was proved and the management was justified in removing 
the respondent from service. 
G 
The order of the Labour Court was impu.gned by the respondent before 
the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No. 25369 
of2004. The learned Judge after hearing the parties dismissed the writ petition 
filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and upheld the findings 
H 
766 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007] 4 S.C.R. 
. ...... 
A of the Inquiry Officer. The learned Judge also.noticed that the respondent had 
not examined himself to establish that the findings of the Inquiry Officer were 
bad or perverse. He found no basis in

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.