SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Mad) 4268

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
C.S. Karnan, J.
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Vellore and Another – Respondents
W.P. No. 38971 of 2004, W.P.M.P. Nos. 10203 of 2005, 512, 513 of 2008
Decided On : 10-07-2013

The dismissal from service should be appropriate to the nature of charges and in line with the principles of natural justice.

Headnote:

Dismissal - Industrial Dispute - Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Act, 1958, Section 3 - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 2A - Labour Court observed that the punishment of dismissal from service is harsh and excessive in nature and directed the Transport Corporation to reinstate the second respondent-conductor with continuity of service with attendant benefits and with 75% back wages.

Fact of the Case:

The second respondent, a conductor, was dismissed from service for irregularities including non-issuance of tickets and shortage of funds. The Labour Court directed the Transport Corporation to reinstate the second respondent with back wages.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the charges against the second respondent did not involve corrupt practice and the second show cause notice issued against him ran against the principles of natural justice.

Issues: The issues included the appropriateness of the dismissal from service, the nature of charges, and the principles of natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the dismissal from service was not appropriate for the minor charges and that the second show cause notice issued against the second respondent was not in line with the principles of natural justice.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, confirming the Labour Court's order to reinstate the second respondent with back wages.

ORDER :

1. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

The writ petitioner/Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation stated that the second respondent herein/employee was working as a conductor in the bus route from Vanniambadi to Alangayam in bus bearing registration No. TN-23-0565 and at the time of checking it was found that he did not collect fare and issue tickets for five passengers for a sum of Rs. 3/- for each, even after they having traveled for two stages from their boarding point and not issued luggage tickets for 10 jaggery bags for a sum of Rs. 6/- for each bag, after collecting the fares and failed to collect the fare and issue ticket of Rs. 2.75/- to one passenger traveling from Alangayam to Arinayakanoor, even though the passenger travelled for two stages from his boarding point and also found that there was a shortage of Rs. 148.80 in the cash bag. So, a charge memo dated 08.05.2000 was issued to him. The second respondent in his explanation dated 20.05.2000 had admitted his irregularities. Subsequently, a domestic enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The Enquiry Officer had submitted his report finding him guilty of all the charges. Based on the enquiry findings and considering his past records, he was issued with the second show cause notice as to why he should not be dismissed from service, for which, he had submitted his explanation. As there was no valid point for consideration in his explanation and considering the grave nature of offence, he was dismissed from service on 02.05.2001.

Against the order of dismissal, the appeal preferred by the second respondent was also rejected.

2. It is submitted that the second respondent had raised an Industrial Dispute before the first respondent. The first respondent, after taking into account the oral and documentary evidence had taken the view that the domestic enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The Labour Court has observed that it would be correct if the enquiry findings is to the effect that the conductor had failed to collect the fare for the luggages and issue tickets for the luggages. The Labour Court has further taken the view that non-issuing of tickets, without stopping the bus between two stages was only in order to compete with the private bus operators and further observed that even though there is shortage in the cash bag, the conductor has to reimburse it at the time of settling the account and hence, held that the punishment of dismissal from service is harsh and also excessive in nature and directed the Transport Corporation to reinstate the second respondent-conductor with continuity of service with attendant benefits and with 75% back wages.

3. Aggrieved by the above order of the first respondent/Labour Court, the petitioner/ Transport Corporation has filed the above writ to call for the records of the first respondent in I.D. No. 97 of 2002 and quash the said orders.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/Transport Corporation argued that the learned Labour Court judge ought not to have re-appreciated the findings in the domestic enquiry. The second respondent had himself admitted the charges and as such, the Labour Court ought not to have ordered reinstatement of the second respondent herein. The Labour Court findings has been made without relying on any documentary evidence. The second respondent's past records are not satisfactorily since he had committed similar nature of offences. Hence, the dismissal order has been passed. The dismissal order can be passed against the insufficiency of employee or corrupt practice of employee. In the instant case, the second respondent had committed corrupt practice in his service. Therefore, the highest punishment of dismissal from service is appropriate for better administration. Therefore, harsh punishment does not apply in this case. As such, the first respondent's order directing writ petitioner/Transport Corporation to reinstate

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top