##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

WRIT PETITION No.4031 of 2008 DATED: 26^th MARCH, 2026

Between V.Vittal …Petitioner

AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bus Depot, Bodhan, Nizamabad

District …Respondent

O R D E R:

The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging

the Award passed by the Labour Court, wherein, the Labour Court denied the reinstatement of the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits including back wages, vide impugned order,

dated 28.03.2005.

02. Heard Sri V.Narsimha Goud, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Shiva Naik, learned counsel appearing for Sri N.Srushman Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State

Road Transport Corporation and perused the record.

03. The petitioner was regularized as a Conductor in the

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in the year 1980. For having collected an amount of Rs.29 each in total Rs.87

from a batch of (3) passengers at their boarding place i.e. Warangal stage No.37 towards their journey from Warangal to Karimnagar ex- stages 37 to 29 and failed to issue tickets to them upto the point of check i.e. stage No.31, Keshavapatnam and for having closed the ticket tray numbers of all denominations against stage No.31, without completing the ticket issues. For which, he was removed from service on 05.03.2002 on the ground of alleged cash and ticket irregularities. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected by the Appellate Authority. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal. Upon consideration of the matter, the Labour Court dismissed the industrial dispute. Aggrieved by the said Award dismissing the industrial dispute, the

petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

Inquiry Officer did not afford reasonable opportunity to him and recorded the statements in a manner contrary to the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the charges, with a view to defeat his defence. Based on the perverse findings recorded in the inquiry report, the petitioner was removed from service. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the Industrial

Tribunal ought to have appreciated that the petitioner had issued 57 tickets to 57 passengers at Warangal, which included the three passengers in question, and that the Tribunal committed an error in not properly appreciating the said fact. It is further contended that the Tribunal erred in relying upon the documents produced by the respondents without the same being marked as exhibits in accordance with law, while upholding the order of removal. It is further contended that the Tribunal, without properly appreciating the evidence available on record, dismissed the industrial dispute. Accordingly, the petitioner prays that this Court may be pleased to allow the Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned Award and direct reinstatement of the petitioner into service with all

consequential benefits, including back wages.

05. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the Corporation contends that, upon appreciation of the entire material available on record, the Tribunal rightly found that the petitioner had admitted his guilt at the spot and subsequently changed his version at later stages. It is further contended that the Tribunal accepted the evidence of the checking official to the effect that the three passengers in question were

travelling from Stage No.37 to Stage No.29 and that the petitioner had collected Rs.87/- from them without issuing tickets. The said evidence remained unshaken. The Tribunal also observed that the SR clearly shows that the petitioner had closed all the ticket tray numbers of various denominations against Stage No.31, and the petitioner had admitted the same during the course of the enquiry.

Therefore, the Tribunal rightly dismissed