BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 13.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA W.A(MD) No.404 of 2024 &

W.P.(MD)No.6537 of 2019 &

C.M.P.(MD)No.3549 of 2024 &

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.5237 of 2019 & 16825 of 2021 In W.A.(MD)No.404 of 2024 The Management, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam Division) Limited, Periyamilaguparai, Tiruchirappalli-1. ... Petitioner / Appellant Vs.

1.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2.N.Padmanabhan (died)

3.P.Ahila

4.P.Sona ... Respondents / Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent praying this Court to set aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.2160 of

2016, dated 28.11.2022.

For Appellant : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For Respondents : Mr.A.Rahul for R3 & R4 In W.P.(MD)No.6537 of 2019 N.Padmanabhan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Management, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam Division) Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, Periyamilaguparai, Tiruchirappalli-1. ... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining the impugned Award in I.D.No.36 of 2002, dated 30.09.2013, passed by the Labour Court Trichy and quash the same insofar as denying the petitioner back wages from the date of dismissal and consequently, direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service, backwages and all other attendant and monitory benefits. For Appellant : Mr.A.Rahul For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh

COMMON JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

Heard both sides.

2. One Padmanabhan joined TNSTC Limited as Conductor on

08.04.1987. While discharging his duties as conductor in the bus plying from Salem to Trichy on 04.11.2000, Padmanabhan is alleged to have collected the ticket fare of Rs.32/-, but failed to issue any ticket. He was charged with misappropriation. Domestic enquiry was conducted and he was dismissed from service on 31.03.2001. He raised industrial dispute and it was taken on file by the Labour Court, Trichy in I.D.No. 36 of 2002. Vide award dated 30.09.2013, the punishment of dismissal was set aside and the workman was ordered to be reinstated without backwages with all attendant benefits and continuity of service. The management did not reinstate the workman. Instead, it filed W.P. (MD)No.2160 of 2016 challenging the Labour Court's award. The workman also filed W.P.(MD)No.439 of 2016 for prosecuting the management for non-implementation of the award. Both the writ petitions were taken up together and disposed of by the learned single Judge vide order dated 28.11.2022 in the following terms:-

“6. Accordingly, the order passed by the Labour Court in I.D.No.36 of 2002, dated 30.09.2013 is hereby confirmed. The petitioner corporation is directed to count the continuity of service and pay employee's provident contribution for the period from 31.03.2002 to 30.09.2013. Based on which, the pension shall be disbursed. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of

12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

Aggrieved by the same, the management alone had filed W.A.(MD)No. 404 of 2024. The workman had also filed W.P.(MD)No.6537 of 2019 questioning the award and seeking payment insofar as it denied the backwages.

3. There is no difficulty in dismissing the writ appeal filed by the management. This is for a very simple reason. The Labour Court had passed the preliminary award dated 12.03.2007 specifically holding that domestic enquiry conducted by the management did not conform to the principles of natural justice. Whenever such preliminary award is passed, the management has given an opportunity to adduce fresh evidence before the Labour Court to sustain the punishment imposed by it on the workman. Unfortunately, in the case on hand, the management neither questioned the preliminary award