While reinstatement with back wages is a normal rule in cases of wrongful termination, the award of back wages involves a discretionary element based on the specific facts of the case, including the employee's conduct and evidence of gainful employment during the period of unemployment.

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed challenging the Award, dated 01.11.2007 passed in I.D.No.47 of 2005 by the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, insofar as denying back wages to the petitioner.

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows :-

(a) The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the respondent Corporation on 31.12.1980 on regular basis. On 25.04.2004, while the petitioner was conducting bus bearing No.AP-9Z-8139 on route No.179-V, a check was exercised at Stage No.6, and the petitioner was found guilty of committing serious cash and ticket irregularities. Accordingly, a memo was issued to the petitioner alleging that he had issued five tickets of Rs.2/- denomination bearing Nos.087/7866611 to 087/7866615) to a batch of passengers on seeing the checking officials and that he was working without MTD-141 chart. The petitioner submitted an explanation to the said Memo alleging that the tickets were issued to the passengers in question at the boarding point and that the same was properly accounted in the SR, and the MTD-141 chart was not supplied by the depot as endorsed in the SR.

(b) Not satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent suspended the petitioner on 11.05.2004 and issued a charge-sheet framing the following charges:

“(i) "For having issued 5 tickets bearing Nos. 087/7866611 to 786615 of Rs.2/- denomination to a batch of 5 passengers found alighting with the above tickets at Stage No.6 i.e., Madhuban Colony, who boarded the bus at Stage No.5 le Katedan (ex. stages 05 to 06), but the above said tickets have been punched at Stage No.4 on sighting the checking officials. Further, it is found that the ticket bearing No. 087/786610 of Rs.2/- denomination has been punched at Stage No.5, which constitutes misconduct in terms of Reg. 28(x) & (xxxii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Reg. 1963."

(ii)"For having found working without MTD-141 chart, which constitutes misconduct in terms of Reg. 28(xxxii) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963."

(c) The petitioner submitted an explanation to the said charge-sheet denying the allegations levelled against him. Not satisfied with the said explanation, an enquiry was ordered. Basing on the enquiry report, the petitioner was removed from service vide proceedings dated 03.12.2004. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed I.D.No.47 of 2005 before the Labour Court and the Labour Court while setting aside the order of removal dated 03.12.2004 directed the respondent herein to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and all other attendant benefits, but without back wages.

(d) Aggrieved by the Award dated 01.11.2007 passed by the Labour Court insofar as not granting back wages, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. The respondent filed counter affidavit stating as follows :-

(a) On 25.04.2004 while the petitioner was conducting bus service at stage No.6, a check was exercised by the TTIs and at that time, the petitioner was standing on the footboard and, upon seeing the checking officials, allegedly attempted to dispose of tickets improperly by throwing them to other passengers. The witnesses produced by the petitioner during the enquiry were non-genuine, as they could not be recognized by the checking officials, nor could they provide any evidence to prove that they have travelled in the bus in question on the relevant date.

(b) The ticketless passengers boarded at Stage No.5 and alighted at Stage No.6, but the t