ORDER:

1. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to the Impugned Award dated 20.08.2009 in I.D. No. 46/2009 published in G.O.Rt.No. 1587, Labour Employment Training and Factories (LAB-I) Department, dated 23.11.2009 allowing the petition in part and directing the petitioners herein to reinstate the 1st respondent into service together with continuity of service, increments, and back-wages and quash the same.

3. The Case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

(a) The 1st respondent had been engaged as Temporary Conductor on 08.10.1996, and his service was regularized on 01.08.1997. The respondent failed to perform service no. 10/2 on the on the route 45k i.e., Koti to Sanath Nagar on 01.11.2006.

(b) The Preliminary Enquiry conducted against the 1st Respondent herein had been proved and the 1st respondent had been suspended from service and charge sheet had been issued by the 3rd Petitioner on 16.11.2006.

(c) Not satisfied by the Written Explanation submitted by the 1st respondent, the 3rd petitioner ordered detailed enquiry. The 1st respondent even though had the privilege to cross examine the witnesses did not examine any of the Witnesses.

(d) After submission of the enquiry report by the Enquiry Officer to the Disciplinary Authority, charges against the petitioner were proved, the Disciplinary Authority had called for objections and the respondent submitted explanation.

(e) Taking into consideration all the material and also the objections of the 1st respondent, the Disciplinary Committee imposed the penalty of Removal from service and issued a Show Cause Notice of removal on 08.02.2007. The 1st respondent submitted an explanation to the show cause and with there being no fresh point worth considering, the Disciplinary Authority had passed the final orders removing the 1st respondent from service vide order dated 23.02.2007.

(f) The Appeal of the 1st respondent before the 2nd petitioner being rejected, the 1st Respondent had preferred a Review before the 1st petitioner which was also rejected on 22.10.2017.

(g) The 2nd respondent tribunal in I.D. No. 46 of 2009 allowed the petition filed by the 1st respondent and directed to reinstate the 1st respondent into service with continuity of service, with all consequential benefits and with full back wages. Hence the Writ Petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD:

(a) Paras 6 and 7 of the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent/workman (G.S. Bangaram) reads as under:

“6. In reply to the grounds and case law cited in the ground are not sustainable in law. It is well settled law the labour court has ample power U/Sec. 11-A of I.D. Act to re-appreciate the material available on record, and can come to different conclusion from that of enquiry officer and can hold the charge as not proved and grant the relief. As such, the impugned award is rightly passed and there is no any irregularities or perversity. Further the petitioners have not made out any grounds to show in the perversities over its findings or irregularities. There are no valid grounds to invite finding in the writ of certiorari. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

7. I further submit that, ever since the date of removal from service I am remained unemployed, as I could not get any employment. Due to that I am facing mush hardship.”

(b) The order dated 10.06.2010 passed in W.P.M.P.No. 16197 of 2010 in W.P.No. 12853 of 2010, reads as under:

“Order:

Sri V. Narasimha Goud, takes notice for the first respondent and seeks time for filing counter affidavit. Post after two weeks.

It is submitted that pursuant to the award of Tribunal, the workman has already reinstated into service. In that view of the matter, pending further orders, there shall be interim stay of award for back-wages on condition that the petitioner depositing 50% of the back-wages to the credit of t