JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. The present Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) arises out of an order dated 18.04.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C.) No. 8058/2010. The learned Single Judge has upheld the award dated 31.03.2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal II, Karkardooma Court, New Delhi in I.D. No. 18/2002 wherein the Tribunal has directed the Appellant management to, inter alia, reinstate the Respondent workman with 40% back wages.

2. The Appellant/Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) has prayed for setting aside of the judgment dated 18.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge as well the award passed by the Tribunal dated 31.03.2010.

3. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the Respondent workman joined the services of DTC as a conductor on 20.04.1983 and his services were regularized on 20.10.1983. On 05.08.1992, the checking staff of the DTC inspected a bus bearing number 6097 on route from Faridabad to Delhi and the checking staff, and while conducting routine check found that the Respondent workman failed to issue a ticket to one passenger, namely Mr. Vijay Pal after collecting the requisite charges i.e. Rs.2/-. The checking staff seized the unpunched ticket bearing number 04/42471 and the statement of the passenger was also recorded.

4. The matter was reported to the management and based upon the report of Shri. Ram Kishan - checking staff, a charge sheet was issued on 26.08.1992. The imputation of misconduct is reproduced as under:

"You are required to explain, why a disciplinary action should not be taken against you under the provision of Delhi Road Transport Corporation (Amended) Act, 1971, read with Section 15 (2) of Delhi Transport Corporation (Conditions of Appointment and Service Rule 1952 for the following irregularities).

"On 05-08-1992 you were performing your duty on Bus No. 6097 of Route No. Faridabad Sector 7 to Delhi, checking staff check the said Bus at 21.45 hours at Faridabad Adda and found that a passenger was travelling in your bus from Faridabad Sector 7 to Faridabad Adda without ticket. You did not issue the ticket after the collecting the due fare Rs.2/- from the passenger."

This shows your dishonesty in dealing with the corporation business and misappropriation of the revenue. Thus, your above mentioned action tantamount to misconduct within the meaning of para 19 (b)(h)&(m) of the standing order governing the conduct of the DTC employees. One copy of the report on which the charge sheet is attached herewith. One copy of your past record is also annexed herewith and your past record will be considered while passing the final order in the case. If you desire to hear in person a request to that effect be made in your explanation. Your explanation should reach the undersigned within 10 days of the receipt of this charge sheet by you. In case you want to inspect any of the relevant documents of reliance available on record, you should report to the undersigned within 24 hours of the receipt of this charge sheet by you.

In the event of failure on your part to report to the undersigned inspection of documents within 24 hours and therefore, your explanation to the charge sheet within 10 days, it will be assumed that you have no explanation, to submit in response to this charge sheet and further action in the case pending against you will be taken in accordance with the regulation without any further reference to you."

5. In the imputation of misconduct, it was alleged that Respondent No.1, while on duty, serving as a conductor, though collected the amount from the passenger, however, did not issue a ticket even after collecting the money from him. The facts further reveal that Mr. Ramesh Chand, Assistant Transport Inspector recorded the statement of the passenger and the thumb impression of the passenger was also obtained on the statement of the passenger.

6. It is pertinent to note that the disciplinary proceedings in the appellant organization ar