The main legal point established is that the Labour Court cannot rely on secondary evidence, and suspicion is not a substitute for proof in departmental proceedings.

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

1. The short but interesting question raised by Mr. Doabia in this writ petition he says in challenge to the award dated October 20, 2014 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, U.T., Chandigarh is that departmental proceedings on a charge of misconduct can be conducted and be made to depend on secondary evidence, by way of photostat copies when the original file is lost. It cannot be said that the case is of no evidence. The facts in brief are that respondent No. 2 was a Conductor in the Chandigarh Transport Undertaking. While journeying from Chandigarh to Delhi, the bus he was on duty carrying passengers was stopped by checking party near Kama Lake, Kamal and the Conductor was found with fake way bills and cash in pocket amounting to a sum of Rs. 3120 and excess cash of Rs. 7506. He was charge sheeted and associated in the inquiry proceedings. He had full opportunity to defend himself. He examined and cross-examined witnesses. The inquiry report was submitted to the disciplinary authority. The charge was proven on the basis of secondary evidence i.e., photocopy of some parts of the original lost file. The disciplinary authority supplied him a copy of report and he filed his reply. The reply was not found satisfactory. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority in the U.T. Administration. The appellate authority heard the workman and reduced the punishment awarded by the disciplinary authority.

2. Dissatisfied with the order in appeal, the Conductor served a demand notice for justice praying that the punishment order be set aside on the ground that the money found in his pocket was his and not collected from the passengers and pocketed by him. There was no corroborative evidence to support defalcation of money and in any case, the original file has been lost and the Conductor not being responsible for the loss and not being charged with loss of the original file could not be adversely dealt with and punished on the basis of Xerox copies of the documents incomplete as there were. Though the Labour Court is not bound by the stick to the letter of the law and the Evidence Act but the underlying principles have been held to be applicable to the Labour Court proceedings as the principles of the Evidence Act are of universal application and represent every corner in the inquiry proceedings in the search of truth and justice. When the dispute was raised, conciliation proceedings were held attempting settlement or a compromise but the efforts failed to bear any fruitful results. The failure report was submitted to the appropriate Government explaining reasons why settlement could not be arrived at. The appropriate government being the designated officer in the U.T. Administration made a reference of the dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication before the Labour Chandigarh.

3. The U.T. Administration entered appearance and contested the reference and supported their order of dismissal that it was justified in the circumstances when the checking party waylaid the Bus and found the driver caught red handed. After all, the checking party had raided the Bus and found things amiss and this was sufficient reason and cause of grave suspicion that the conductor was making a fast buck. The workman had committed a major misconduct for which he deserved no leniency, sufficient to merit any further reduction in punishment.

4. The Labour Court has applied the principle that the Court cannot depend on secondary evidence while venturing to do justice to do more than just look at evidence to examine the proportionality of the punishment with respect to the gravity of the charge levelled against the delinquent.

5. In Workmen of Balmadies Estates Vs. Management Balmadies Estate and Others, (2008) 4 SCC 517, the Supreme Court examined such an issue in domestic inquiry settings and held that standard and yardsticks applicable to a