IMPORTANT POINT
The reviewing authority must provide adequate justification for enhancing punishment in disciplinary proceedings, adhering to principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

M. K. Thakker, J.

1. This petition is filed under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the award passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Nadiad in Reference (IT) No.37 of 2023 dated 29.03.2024 whereby the Reference was filed by the respondent herein was allowed and the punishment, which was enhanced by the reviewing authority of stoppage of one year increment without future effect came to be set aside.

2. It is the case of the present petitioner that the respondent was serving as a conductor in the petitioner corporation and when he was on duty on 15.08.2021 on rout of Kapadvanj to Surat, at that point of time, he did not issue the ticket of one passenger, who was traveling from Nadiad to Vadodara and not collected the fare. The chargesheet was served to him and the departmental inquiry was initiated wherein the punishment of deduction of Rs.100 from his salary was imposed by the disciplinary authority on 28.08.2021. Feeling punishment is inadequeate, suo motu review was initiated thereby the punishment was enhanced for stoppage of one increment without future effect on 31.12.2021. Against the aforesaid enhancement of punishment, appeal was preferred before the learned appellate authority and learned appellate authority has confirmed the order passed by reviewing authority against which Reference was preferred being Reference I.T. No.37 of 2023 which was awarded in favour of the respondent and the same is subject matter of challenge before this Court.

3. Heard the learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia for the petitioner.

4. Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia submits that there are past records of the respondents having seven similar types of misconduct and he is habitual for this type of misconduct therefore, reviewing authority has enhanced the punishment of stoppage of one increment without future effect. Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia submits that without assigning the reasons with regard to the disproportionate or shocking punishment, the learned labour Court has awarded the Reference in favour of the respondent. Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia submits that as the fare was not collected from one passenger, grave misconduct was committed, and thereafter, the reviewing authority has enhanced the punishment of stoppage of one increment only without future effect. Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia submits that the reviewing authority has issued the show cause notice, however, the respondent did not appear before the reviewing authority, thereafter, reviewing authority has enhanced the punishment recording his absence. Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia submits that without any cogent reasons assigned, learned labour Court has set aside the punishment of stoppage of one increment without future effect and therefore, this petition is required to be allowed.

5. Considering the submissions made by the Learned advocate Ms.Sejal Mandavia as well as perusing the reasons assigned by the learned labour Court it transpires from the record that, route of the bus where the present respondent was serving as a conductor was from Kapadvanj to Surat on 15.01.2021. There were 64 passengers, who were travelling in the bus and bus was overloaded. As per the submissions of the respondent, one passenger has informed that he is having the pass to travel from Kapadvanj to Surat and he did not procure the ticket from the respondent. The Checking Officer had checked the tickets of the passengers and it was found that the said passenger has not shown any pass. The Checking Officer had collected the fare of Rs.61 as well as the penalty of Rs.500 from the said passenger and without recording any statement to the effect that why the tickets were not procured, the passenger was permitted to go from the bus. Considering this explanation, the disciplinary authority has imposed the punishment of deduction of Rs.100 from his salary, which was reviewed by the authority by initiating the suo motu proceeding