The main legal point established in the judgment is that the establishment of misconduct in a detailed award passed by the Labour Court, supported by evidence and legal principles, justifies the dismissal of an employee.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. - This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

2. The present petition challenges the impugned order dated 5th October, 2021 in LID No. 559/2019 titled Shri Biri Singh v. Delhi Transport Corporation passed by the PO, Labour Court-08, Rouse avenue District Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter 'Labour Court'). Vide the impugned award the claim of the Workman/Petitioner (hereinafter 'Workman') who was working as a Conductor with the Respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation (hereinafter as 'DTC') was rejected by the Labour Court.

3. The background of the case is that the Petitioner was appointed as Conductor in the DTC in the year 1983. The case of DTC is that on the intervening night of 19th/20th april 1991 when the Workman was on duty on bus no.9065, a surprise checking team entered the bus at Safdarjung airport. The checking staff found that 12 passengers who were travelling in the bus were not issued tickets by the Conductor despite collecting the cash from them. a chargesheet was served on the Workman on 6th May 1991. The charges that were alleged against him are as under:

'i) That the workman received the complete fare form the passengers who boarded the bus from Jama Masjid, but did not issue tickets to the passengers till Safdarjung airport.

ii) Cash was found less with the workman of Rs.2.45 paise on checking the cash.

iii) The workman was found dishonest towards his duties.

iv) Causing intentionally financial loss to the Corporation.

v) Refused to get his cash checked.

vi) Refusing to sign and refusing to take the challan.

vii) Refusal. to give unpunched ticket to the checking staff'

4. The Workman was asked to submit a reply and an enquiry was conducted. after a detailed enquiry, the removal of the Workman was recommended. He was, accordingly, terminated on 6th May, 1992. a demand notice was thereafter served by the Workman in 1995 seeking reinstatement. Since, there was no response from DTC, he filed a claim before the Labour Court. The enquiry proceedings were set aside by the Labour Court on vide order 1st February, 2005 holding that the enquiry was held in violation of principles of natural justice and finding of the enquiry officer were perverse. Thus, fresh evidence was adduced by the DTC for proving the misconduct of the Conductor. The aTI, Sh. Ishwar Singh was examined as MW-2 on 03rd april 2006 by DTC. Finally, vide order dated 5th October, 2021 the claim of the Workman was dismissed by the Labour Court. The findings of the labour Court are as under:

'27. Facts and circumstances of the case lead to the only inference that workman having collected lesser amount as per prevalent malpractice had neither made any entry in the way-bill nor issued any ticket to the group of 12 passengers having boarded at Jama Masjid till the bus was stopped by the checking staff near Safdarjung airport and tried to hand over punched tickets to the passengers after necessary entry in the way-bill when he was stopped by the checking team and punched tickets were collected from the workman.

28. Non-examination of Sh. Shakeel ahmed by management cannot be considered fatal in view of testimony of MW-2 Shri Ishwar Singh who has deposed that statement Ex.MW-2/3 on the reverse side of challan slip was written by the passenger.

29. Management has therefore succeeded in establishing the mis-conduct committed by workman in view of absence of valid explanation justifying shortage of Rs.2.45. Removal of workman from service is therefore held to be legal and justified in view of five adverse entries in his past record.

30. Reference under Section 10(1)(c) read with Section 12(5) of the I.D. act is accordingly answered by holding removal of workman Shri Biri Singh from service as legal and justified.'

5. Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, ld. Counsel appearing for the Workman submits that there were various discrepancies in the evidence adduced by DTC. In fact, the Workman was not found carrying any surplus cash when the checking team entered t