The grant of back wages upon reinstatement is not automatic; the initial burden lies on the workman to plead and prove they were not gainfully employed elsewhere during the period of their removal, enabling the court to exercise discretion based on the facts and culpability shown.

ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the record relating the impugned award dated 22.12.2015 made in I.D.No.11/2014 on the file of the 2nd Respondent – Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Warangal to the extent not granting attendant benefits and full back wages to the petitioner for the period out of employment and set aside the same to that extent as arbitrary, perverse and contrary to law and consequently grant attendant benefits and full back wages to the petitioner and pass…”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Driver on daily wage basis on 16.11.1987, and his services were subsequently regularized on 01.01.1990. However, on 29.11.2011, while the petitioner was operating the Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM), on route Warangal – Shiridi, a check was exercised at Stage No.17-Basmath at about 23-45 hours, wherein, the petitioner was alleged to have been involved in cash and ticket irregularities, having collected lesser fare from the passenger. As such, the petitioner was issued with a Charge Sheet dated 12.12.2011, and after considering his explanation, a domestic enquiry was ordered. The enquiry officer has conducted an enquiry and accordingly, held charge No.2 as proved. Basing on the said enquiry report, the petitioner was removed from service vide proceedings dated 23.04.2012. The appeal, revision and mercy petitions preferred by the petitioner were also rejecting vide orders dated 06.08.2012, 04.03.2013 and 30.05.2013 respectively, confirming his removal. Thereafter, the petitioner raised I.D.No.11 of 2014 before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal, (for short, ‘the Tribunal), and the Tribunal has passed the award dated 22.12.2015, setting aside the petitioner’s removal order and directed reinstatement with continuity of service, however, denied backwages and attendant benefits. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. Heard Sri A.G. Satyanarayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Sri N. Chandrasekhar, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the entire enquiry proceedings are vitiated as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity to examine the witnesses. However, despite the enquiry officer recording that no passenger has boarded at Bodhan and that tickets were issued to the passengers boarded at Nizamabad, he failed to arrive at a definite conclusion with respect to Charge No.,1 and erroneously and arbitrarily held Charge No.2 as proved, basing on which report, the petitioner has been illegally removed from service. It is further contended that the appeal, revision and mercy petitions have been rejected, without properly appreciating the facts or material on record. As such, the petitioner was constrained to approach the Tribunal and filed I.D.No.11 of 2014, wherein, the Tribunal has categorically held that the petitioner had no intention to defraud the revenue of the Corporation and that it is not a case of misappropriation. It was also held that the passenger has given a false statement to the TTIs that he boarded the bus at Bodhan for Basmath, and it was a case of overriding by the passenger bu