High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 08 GUJ CK 0046

Chandulal Kantilal Thakore vs Divisional Controler

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 11 August 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. S. Jhaveri, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Special Civil Application No. 5977 of 2004

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 320 words

K.S. Jhaveri, J.—By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Complaint (IT) No. 98/2000 dated 05.09.2003, whereby, the said complaint was rejected and to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits.

2.

The facts in brief are that the petitioner was charge-sheeted for disciplinary proceedings in relation to an incident that had occurred on 16.08.1999 where the petitioner was allegedly found to have committed certain irregularities while issuing tickets. Ultimately, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dated 20.06.2000. The first appeal filed before the appellate authority of the respondent-Corporation came to be rejected.

3.

Against the said order of punishment, the petitioner filed a complaint u/s 33 of the I.D. Act before the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad. The Tribunal, after hearing both the sides, rejected the complaint of the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

4.

Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. It appears from the record that though the petitioner had collected fares from the passengers, he had not issued the tickets. The said fact was established from the oral evidence of one of the passengers, who was examined at Ex.93. In the inquiry proceedings, the say of the petitioner that he could not issue the tickets at the relevant time, on account of some argument with a passenger, was also found to be trustworthy. Thus, the charges levelled against the petitioner were proved in the inquiry proceedings. Looking to the evidence on record, the Tribunal was completely justified in dismissing the complaint filed by the petitioner. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at in the impugned order and hence, find no reasons to interfere with the same.

5.

For the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No costs.