JUDGMENT :

This appeal is filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) challenging the dismissal of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge. By his order the learned Single Judge has upheld the modification of the punishment imposed on the workman by the Industrial Tribunal.

2. The facts are not in dispute.

3. In respect of one more allegation that during a surprise check the workman had failed to issue tickets to three passengers out of eight passengers, a proceeding was initiated and after conducting an enquiry and obtaining the report, the Disciplinary Authority proceeded to impose punishment of withholding of four annual increments with cumulative effect and by treating the period of suspension as not on duty.

4. In respect of another allegation that during a surprise check, it was found that the workman had failed to issue tickets to six passengers of Rs.3/-each, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated and on the receipt of a report, the Disciplinary Authority had imposed punishment of withholding of three increments with cumulative effect and further ordered to recover a sum of Rs.1,000/-from the salary of the workman in five monthly installments.

5. In respect of one more allegation that during a surprise check, it was found that the workman had failed to issue tickets to three passengers of Rs.10/-each, a proceeding was initiated. However, the Disciplinary Authority proceeded to dispense with the enquiry and on the basis of the records, came to the conclusion that the workman was guilty and imposed a punishment of withholding of one ensuing annual increment for two years without cumulative effect and further ordered to recover Rs.300/-in two installments from the salary of the workman.

6. In respect of these three punishments imposed, the workman raised an industrial dispute and the same was referred to the Industrial Tribunal.

7. The Industrial Tribunal, on consideration of the matter, came to the conclusion that the reference deserved to be allowed in part.

8. The Industrial Tribunal proceeded to set aside the punishment imposed in respect of reduction of basic pay by three stages and in lieu of the same, imposed punishment of reduction of one increment of basic pay with cumulative effect.

9. In respect of punishment relating to withholding of four annual increments with cumulative effect, the Industrial Tribunal set aside the entire punishment.

10. In respect of punishment of withholding of one ensuing annual increment without cumulative effect, the Tribunal imposed a fine of Rs.575/-which was five times the amount of penalty to be recovered from the passengers.

11. The KSRTC, being aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal passed in the reference, challenged the same by filing the writ petition.

12. Learned Single Judge, on consideration of the matter, came to the conclusion that there was no ground to interfere with the award of the Industrial Tribunal and proceeded to dismiss the writ petition. It is against this order of dismissal, the present appeal is filed.

13. Smt.H.R.Renuka, learned counsel for the KSRTC strenuously contended that the Industrial Tribunal had no jurisdiction to reduce the punishment after having recorded a finding of guilt. She submitted that the power to substitute a lesser punishment to the Tribunal was available only in case of discharge or dismissal under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act and the Industrial Tribunal could not substitute its own punishment in other cases. She submitted by reducing the punishment, the entire misconduct of the workman was virtually ignored and he was being let off with an insignificant punishment, which in reality, would be of no consequence to the workman.

14. Smt.Manjula Kulkarni, learned counsel for the workman, on the other hand, contended that the award of the Tribunal could not said to be perverse or irrational. She contended that the learned Single Judge had rightly come to the conclusion that there was no warrant for interference un