ORDER:

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari declaring the award made in I.D.No.85 of 2012 on the file of the Chairman cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Ananthapur as illegal, arbitrary and quash the same by calling for records relating to the said award dated

21.04.2014 and pass….”

2. The Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Anantapur has passed an Award in I.D.No.85 of 2012, dated 21.04.2014 wherein the issue that is referred for adjudication is: When the Regional Secretary, APSRTC, National Mazdoor Union, Kurnool Region referred the matter for adjudication, demanding the revocation of punishment of deferment of annual increment when next falls for a period of two years which shall have effect of postponing his future increments and to treat the period of suspension i.e., from the date of suspension till he reports for duty as „Non on duty‟ for the purpose of gratuity, increments and leave against Sri P.Md.Ismail, Conductor imposed by Depot Manager, APSRTC, Kurnool-I vide final order No.01/535(17)/02-

KNL-I, dated 23.5.2022.

3. The employee was appointed as Casual Conductor in the respondents Corporation during the year 1987. His services were regularized in the year 1989. While being so, basing on the report of the Senior Traffic Inspector, Bangalore, the workman (delinquent) was charge sheeted with three (3) charges, for which, he has submitted a fair explanation, and thereafter, duly conducting an enquiry, the workman was placed under suspension, and after enquiry, a major penalty of punishment “the deferment of one annual grade increment for a period of two (2) years with cumulative effect besides treating the period of suspension as „not on duty‟ for the purpose of gratuity, increments and leave” was imposed upon the workman. Later the Labour Court has passed an order entitling the workman for restoration of his deferred annual increment and the period of suspension was treated as „on duty‟ for all purposes. Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation has filed present writ petition.

4. While ordering notice before admission on 15.7.2015, this Court passed the following interim order:

“There shall be interim suspension of the Award dated 21.04.2014 in I.D.No.85 of 2012 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapur, until further orders”.

5. The Labour Court having considered the counter filed by the respondents in I.D.No.85 of 2012 categorically observed in the Award that the respondents have nowhere denied the averments made in the claim statement about the triple duty that was allotted to the Workman i.e., from Bangalore to Nellore. Every employer has got right to direct his employees to perform duty as per rules and regulations and performing double duty or triple duty will be at the choice of the Workman i.e, the employee and employer do not enjoy any right to pressurise his employee to perform duty extra time or double or triple duty.

6. Admittedly, this is a case in which charges were levelled against the workman, on the ground that, the Workman refused to perform triple duty. Thus, when the charges levelled against the Workman were itself unjustifiable, any amount of evidence collected over the said charges during the domestic enquiry and findings given, do not hold good.

7. Heard and perused the material placed on record.

8. In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is totally justified in demanding revocation of punishment that is imposed upon the Workman through Ex.M-3 final order No.01/535(17)/02-KNL-I, dated 23.05.2002 and accordingly an Award was passed stating that the workman is thus entitled for restoration of his deferred annual increment and the period of suspension shall be treated as „on duty‟ for all purposes.

9. Mr.K.Viswanadham, learned Standin