Sangeeta Chandra, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Award dated 28.5.2013 passed by the respondent no. 2 - Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Rampur in Adjudication Case no. 41 of 1992 (Lakhan Singh Vs. U.P.S.R.T.C.) by which it has set aside the removal order dated 24.5.1989 and directed reinstatement of the respondent no. 1 with full back wages and other consequential benefits.

2. As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the respondent no. 1 was working on the post of conductor in Agra Depot of the Corporation. On 29.4.1987, the respondent no. 1 was deputed on bus no. UPU-2731. This bus was checked enroute by the Checking Party comprising of Ram Lal Arora and Kanhai Singh, Traffic Inspectors. It was found that 48 passengers were travelling without tickets while the respondent no. 1 had already realised the fare from such passengers, but had not made entries in the Way Bill nor issued tickets to them. The Checking Party thereafter issued block tickets to 40 passengers travelling from Bisauli to Chandausi and 8 passengers travelling from Bisauli to Mundia. As the Checking Party was making entries on the Waybill, the respondent no. 1 created obstruction in checking the bus and snatched away the Waybill from the Checking Party due to which it was torn and the driver sped away with the bus.

3. A report of the misconduct of the conductor was mae on 30.4.1987 by Sri R.L. Arora. The Station-Incharge on the basis of thereof sent a report on 4.5.1987. The respondent no. 1 was suspended on 18.5.1987. A charge sheet was issued to him on 8.10.1987.

4. The respondent no. 1 replied to the charge sheet, but his reply was not found satisfactory and a regular enquiry was held thereafter wherein the two members of Checking Party - R.L. Arora and Kanhai Singh were examined by the Inquiry Officer and the respondent no. 1 as well. His defence witness - Ashrafi Lal - the driver of the bus on that day was also examined. Opportunity of cross examination was given.

5. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 31.10.1988 to the effect that the charge of misconduct stood proved against the respondent no. 1. A show cause notice was issued on 15.11.1988 as to why his services be not terminated and balance pay for the suspension period be not forfeited.

6. The respondent no. 1 submitted his reply and finding his reply unsatisfactory, the respondent no. 1 was removed from service by the order dated 24.5.1989. The respondent no. 1 filed a departmental appeal which was rejected by the Appellate Authority on 5.2.1990. The respondent no. 1 raised an industrial dispute before the Deputy, Labour Commissioner.

7. The Corporation filed its written statement. The Deputy, Labour Commissioner nevertheless referred the matter to the State Government and the State Government under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred it to the Labour Court which was registered as Adjudication Case No. 41 of 1992.

8. Before the Labour Court, a written statement was filed on behalf of the respondent no. 1, alleging that false and fabricated charges had been levelled upon him and he was removed without affording proper opportunity of hearing to him. A written statement was also filed by the Corporation before the Labour Court disputing the allegations. Rejoinder affidavits were also filed thereafter.

9. The Corporation proposed to amend the written statement to incorporate fresh pleading with regard to grant of opportunity to produce evidence before the Labour Court to prove the charge, but the Labour Court rejected the application by its order dated 5.1.1993.

10. The Corporation thereafter filed Writ Petition No. 12734 of 1993 challenging the Reference Order dated 16.3.1992 and the order dated 5.1.1993 rejecting the amendment application of the petitioner. An interim order was granted by this Court staying the further proceedings in Adjudication Case No. 41 of 1992.

11. This writ petition was ultimately disposed of