##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

233 CWP-7618-2017

Date of Decision : January 28, 2026

GURIQBAL SINGH

-PETITIONER

V/S

THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,

BATHINDA AND ORS.

-RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present: Ms. Pawandeep Kaur, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel)

for the petitioner.

Ms. Pratibha Bali, Asstt. A.G., Punjab

for the respondents No.2 and 3.

***

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner/workman

assails the award dated 19.09.2013 (Annexure P-1), passed by the

respondent No.1/Industrial Tribunal, Bathinda, whereby the reference made

under Section 10(I)C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter

referred to as “the I.D. Act”) was answered against him and his termination

was held to be legal and valid.

2. Assailing the impugned award, learned counsel for the

workman advances a two-pronged argument. Firstly, it is contended that at

no stage of the proceedings, whether at the time of issuance of the

chargesheet or in the enquiry report, the specific amount allegedly

embezzled was ever quantified. It is argued that once the respondent Nos.2

and 3/management themselves failed to specify the amount of

embezzlement, the termination order as well as the impugned award are

1 of 4

::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 11:43:57 :::

CWP-7618-2017 2

vitiated and liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

3. Secondly, placing emphasis on the long and unblemished

service rendered by the workman for nearly 27 years, learned counsel

submits that the extreme penalty of termination has been imposed for a

single alleged act of misconduct, ignoring his otherwise clean service

record. It is, thus, contended that the punishment of termination is grossly

disproportionate and calls for interference by this Court in exercise of

powers under Section 11-A of the I.D. Act.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the management submits that

the workman was found guilty of embezzlement of government revenue by

indulging in overwriting/cutting of ticket numbers and re-issuing the same

tickets to passengers after collecting fare. It is contended that the workman

was duly served with a chargesheet detailing the allegations and was

afforded an opportunity to submit his explanation. Upon finding his reply

unsatisfactory, a regular departmental enquiry was initiated, during which

the workman was granted full opportunity to participate and cross-examine

departmental witnesses. The enquiry report was thereafter supplied to him,

inviting his comments, and only after complying with all statutory

requirements and principles of natural justice, the order of termination was

passed.

5. Learned counsel for the management further contends that

since the mandatory procedure was duly followed and no infirmity or

perversity was established in the enquiry proceedings, the Industrial

Tribunal rightly upheld the termination. The impugned award, therefore,

calls for no interference by this Court.

2 of 4

::: Downloaded on - 31-01-2026 11:43:57 :::

CWP-7618-2017 3

6. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has

perused the record.

7. What emerges from a studied survey of the record is that the

workman was appointed as a Conductor on 17.05.1975 and his services

were terminated on 08.11.2002 after conducting a regular departmental

enquiry. The enquiry was initiated pursuant to allegations that the workman

had defrauded government revenue by overwriting ticket numbers and re-

issuing used tickets to passengers. Upon receipt of 17 reports pertaining to

such acts of embezzlement, the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, issued

a chargesheet dated 21.06.1999, which was duly received by the workman

on 29.06.1999. His reply dated 13.07.1999 was considered but found

unsatisfactory, whereafter an enquiry officer was appointed on 16.07.1999

to hold a regular departmental enquiry.

8. It further surges forth from the record that the workman

participated in the enquiry proceedings and was afforded an opportunity to

cross-examine the d