High Court Of Delhi
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
MANAGEMENT OF DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Appellant
Versus
RADHEY LAL - Respondents
WP (C) 13212 Of 2004
Decided On : 12/05/2006
Labour Court - Misconduct - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 10 - Section 33(2)(b) - Section 15(2)(vi) of DRTA - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 10, Section 33(2)(b), Section 15(2)(vi) of DRTA] - The court discussed the principles of natural justice, the scope of adjudication before the Labour Court, and the admissibility of evidence in the enquiry. It highlighted the importance of allowing both the management and the employee to adduce evidence and emphasized that the Labour Court has a duty to consider all logical and probative material, even if it does not adhere to technical rules of evidence. The court also emphasized the need to weigh the evidence on the balance of probabilities and consider the entire relevant material produced before it.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent, a bus conductor, was dismissed from service for misconduct related to not stopping the bus for checking and issuing tickets to passengers during the running of the bus. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication.
Finding of the Court:
The Labour Court found that the domestic enquiry was not fair and valid, and the evidence produced by the management against the respondent was not sufficient to prove misconduct. The court also observed that the award passed by the Tribunal was perverse and set it aside.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the dismissal, the fairness of the domestic enquiry, and the admissibility of evidence in the enquiry.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principles of natural justice, the scope of adjudication before the Labour Court, and the admissibility of evidence in the enquiry. It highlighted the importance of allowing both the management and the employee to adduce evidence and emphasized that the Labour Court has a duty to consider all logical and probative material, even if it does not adhere to technical rules of evidence.
Final Decision: The award passed by the Tribunal was deemed perverse and set aside. The writ petition was allowed.
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
( 1 ) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of award dated 2. 12. 2003 passed by the Labour Court VII, Delhi, whereby the petitioner was directed to reinstate the respondent with full back wages and continuity of service and has also challenged the order passed by the Labour court dated 4th July, 2003, directing the petitioner to grant employment to the respondent in DTC during the pendency of the proceedings as interim relief. It was also directed that the respondent be either allowed to join as a conductor or be given any other suitable post.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY, the facts are that the respondent Radhey Lal was working as a conductor with the petitioner. On 4th August, 1993, he was on duty on bus No. DL-1p-9445 from Gwalior to Delhi. Checking staff of DTC gave signal to this bus at 7. 50 PM when the bus was near Dom Pura Road, Murena for checking of the bus. At that time, the checking staff found the conductor sitting at the bonnet of the bus near the driver. The bus was not stopped for checking despite signal of checking staff. The checking staff chased the bus in a jeep. The bus was compelled to stop by bringing the jeep ahead of bus by overtaking it after about 2 kms. The passengers were checked by the checking staff. It was found that 10 passengers having ticket Serial No. 00037276 to 85 were issued tickets during the running of the bus when it was being chased by the checking staff. All these tickets were not entered into the way voucher. On enquiry from the passengers, they told that they had boarded the bus from Gwalior for Murena and paid Rs. 9 each to the conductor. The Conductor did not issue any ticket to them but, on seeing the checking staff and when checking staff was chasing the bus, he hurriedly issued tickets to them.
( 3 ) A charge sheet was issued to the conductor in respect of the above misconduct on 8th September, 1993. It was mentioned in the charge sheet that he also refused to sign the statements of passengers, which was taken in his presence. His way voucher was incomplete and he violated the Standing Orders and rules governing the conduct of conductor, as issued by DTC. The respondent denied the charges levied against him and took the stand that it was not his duty to stop the bus but it was the duty of the driver. He denied that the bus was chased or the statement of any passenger was recorded in his presence. Regarding incompletion of way voucher, he submitted that he was going to complete the same but was not allowed to do so by the checking staff, who took away the same.
( 4 ) AN enquiry was conducted into the charges and the Enquiry Officer found misconduct proved. The punishment of removal from service was imposed on the respondent, looking into his past conduct. The past conduct of the respondent was as under:
DETAILS OF THE CONDUCTOR/driver's PAST RECORD
Sh . Radhey Lal Badge No. 10648 T. No. 16249
S/o Sh. Nanak Chand Date of Appointment 25. 5. 1977-MR 24-7-75 (Apprentice)
Sr.
No. 1 IPD/al (T)CS/111/79/10864 DM IPD Dt. 10101979 For two used tickets found in the ticket block For loss of tickets and leather bag on 20. 2. 1980 For Non Issuance Of Tickets on 20. 12. 1979 2 IPD/AL ( T)/loss of tickets7/80 dt. 7-03-1980 3 IPD Al (T)CS-108/80/6101 dt. 30. 6. 80
Order of the Authority Reasons Nature of penalty
"censured"
"warned"
4 IPD/Al ( T)CS 122/80 7571 dt. 24/7/80 For Non Issuance Of Tickets on 30. 9. 1979
5 IPD/al (TO Susp/822588/31. 3. 1982 Placed under suspension w. ef. 1-4-82 for Non Issuance Of Tickets 7 cash Short of Rs. 150 on 17. 3. 1982 Put back on duty w. e. f 14. 4. 82 pending enquiry finalization of the case For misbehaved with passengers "warned" 6 IPD/Al ( T)Cs 82/2523 dt. 14. 4. 82 7 IPD/al (T) St. /comp/156/81 30-3-1982 8 IPD/al/ (T)/Susp /cs 282/83/562/dt. 7. 2. 83 Placed under suspension w. e. f.
Stop Page of his next due increment for six months without cumulative effect "stop Pag
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.