The judgment emphasizes that removal from service requires clear evidence of misconduct, and under Article 226, courts should respect the findings of disciplinary authorities unless proven irrational.

JUDGMENT :

A. Hari Haranadha Sarma, J.

Introductory:

1. This Writ Appeal is directed against the orders dated 27.01.2016 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.5810 of 2010.

2. Respondent No.1 is the writ petitioner. Respondent No.2 is the proforma party and respondent No.1 before the learned Single Judge.Appellants are respondent Nos.2 to 4 in the writ proceedings.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner and the respondents, as and when necessary.

4. The charge against the writ petitioner is that he unauthorisedly allowed a known person to drive the Service Bus bearing No.AP 11 Z 3207 on 10.09.2006, which constitutes misconduct under Regulation 28(ii) of the A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963.

5. The charge sheet was served by the Depot Manager, Gokavaram / respondent No.2 on the writ petitioner and based on the enquiry report dated 18.12.2006, removal order dated 23.01.2007 was issued by respondent No.2.

6. The remedies of appeal and review were not helpful to the writ petitioner and he raised an Industrial Dispute vide I.D.No.89 of 2007 before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, which suffered dismissal. Questioning the sustainability of the award passed by respondent No.1 Tribunal, the writ petition was filed and the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, declaring that the writ petitioner is entitled for all monetary benefits, including backwages and all other attendant benefits.

Appeal:

7. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, the present appeal is filed contending that the learned Single Judge ought not to have interfered with the concurrent findings of the disciplinary authority and the Industrial Tribunal.

Grounds urged in the Appeal:

8(i). The scope of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is very limited. Appreciation of evidence or substitution of punishment is not possible, particularly when the orders of the Industrial Tribunal are reasonable and when the domestic enquiry was found to be valid by the Industrial Tribunal.

(ii). There is admitted misconduct on the part of the writ petitioner in the writ petition and before the enquiry officer. As per the Regulation 28(ii) of the A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963 (for short “1963 Regulations”), driving vehicles of the Corporation without possessing a prior licence or without being authorised in writing to do so or allowing any other person to act in such manner, constitutes an act of „misconduct‟.

(iii). It is a matter of fact that the writ petitioner allowed an unauthorised person to drive and operate the bus. In such context, the findings of the learned Single Judge otherwise are not correct.

Hearing:

9. Heard both sides extensively. Perused the material available on record.

Points:

10. The points that arise for determination in this appeal are:

1) Whether the charge against the writ petitioner that there was misconduct as contemplated under service regulations was properly appreciated by the disciplinary authority and the Industrial Tribunal in accordance with law and evidence?

2) Whether the orders of the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition and setting aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Visakhapatnam in I.D.No.89 of 2007 are proper and require any interference?

3) What is the result of the appeal?

Point Nos.1 and 2

11. As per the charge sheet, the charge reads as follows:

“For having unauthorizedly allowed an known person to drive your service Bus AP 11 Z 3207 from Kunavaram to Bhadrachalam while you were performing duty as Driver of 14.45 hrs. Bhadrachalam N/o Service with vehicle No.AP 11 Z 3207 on 10.09.2006 which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28(ii) of A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees (conduct) Regulations, 1963.”

Allegatio