Summary dismissal under service rules relying solely on unverified media reports alleging misconduct invalid without employee's admission of guilt and independent inquiry, violating natural justice; reinstatement with partial back wages upheld.

JUDGMENT :

AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard finally with consent of Mr. M. D. Shinde, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. V. Bhamre, learned Counsel for the respondent.

3. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 06.09.2022, passed by the Industrial Court Jalgaon in Revision Application (ULP) No.11 of 2022 whereby the Revision Application of the petitioner was dismissed, the petitioner/M.S.R.T.C. is before this Court in the present petition.

4. The facts in the case are not disputed by any party. The respondent was serving as a driver with the petitioner/ M.S.R.T.C. It so happened that an accident occurred on 31.07.2019 on Amalner to Indore Road while the respondent was driving the M.S.R.T.C. bus No.MH 20 BL 2404. Consequent to the accident, certain news were telecasted on television alleging that the bus driver was driving the bus in drunken condition. Relying upon the news flashed on television as also published in newspapers, the M.S.R.T.C. invoked the DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL RULES particularly clause no. 6(1) of the Rules, and without conducting any departmental inquiry dismissed the respondent from the services.

5. The respondent challenged the dismissal vide complaint ULP No.32 of 2019 in the Court of learned Judge, Labour Court, Jalgaon. The Labour Court heard the parties and also considered to the provisions of DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL RULES of M.S.R.T.C. It was observed that the respondent was dismissed from the services merely on the basis of the news flashed on television as also publications in the newspaper. It was also observed that the M.S.R.T.C. has not even made an independent inquiry to confirm the truthfulness of the news flashed on the television and the newspapers publications. Observing that the dismissal of the respondent was against the principles of natural justice and also the concerned provisions of the DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL RULES of the M.S.R.T.C., the Labour Court allowed the complaint and directed the M.S.R.T.C. to reinstate the respondent with 50% back wages.

6. The said order was taken up in challenge by the M.S.R.T.C. before the Industrial Court, Jalgaon vide Revision Application ULP No.11 of 2022. Worth to note the respondent also challenged the directions given by the Labour Court to the extent of restraining the back wages to the extent of 50%.

7. After hearing both the parties, the Industrial Court, Jalgaon dismissed both the Revision Applications. M.S.R.T.C. then challenged the orders passed by the Labour Court and Industrial Court in the present Writ Petition.

8. With the able assistance of the learned Counsel for the respective parties, I have gone through the case papers of the Writ Petition.

9. Mr. M. D. Shinde, learned Counsel for the M.S.R.T.C. has produced before me the DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL RULES of the M.S.R.T.C. Clause no.5 and 6 of the Rules deal about the action to be taken against an employee in respect of alleged misconduct. The said clauses read as follows:

10. The sole contention of the petitioner is that the respondent’s case is covered by clause no.6(1) and hence the M.S.R.T.C. was justified in not conducting any departmental inquiry. Looking to the clause no.6(1) of the Rules, it is admitted fact that the respondent has not and never accepted the guilt alleged by the M.S.R.T.C. Secondly, so far as truthfulness of the offence is concerned, Mr. Shinde, learned Counsel for the M.S.R.T.C. would fairly argue that the action was taken on the basis of the news items flashed on the television