Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Pansuriya vs Divisional Controller

M.R. Shah, J.—By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner-workman has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar dated 19/12/2009 in Reference (I.T) No. 35/2007 by which the Industrial Tribunal has dismissed the said Reference.

Departmental inquiry was initiated against the petitioner by the respondent for the misconduct of recovering the amount and not issuing the tickets to the passengers. In the departmental inquiry the charge of recovering the amount and not issuing the tickets to the passengers came to be proved and established and the disciplinary authority imposed punishment of withholding increment for 10 years with future effect. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the disciplinary authority of imposing punishment of withholding increment for 10 years with future effect, the petitioner preferred departmental appeal, which came to be confirmed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner-workman raised industrial dispute, which was numbered as Reference (I.T) No. 35/2007 and the learned tribunal vide order dated 19/12/2009 dismissed the said Reference, against which the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Shri Mukesh Rathod, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner-workman has tried to assail the impugned judgment and award by submitting that imposing of penalty of withholding increment for 10 years with future effect is excessive looking to the charge proved against the petitioner and, therefore, it is requested to consider the above and pass an appropriate order.

Ms. Sejal Mandavia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent has vehemently submitted that as the charge and misconduct of recovering the amount and not issuing the tickets to the passengers is proved and considering the fact that in the past there were 23 defaults against the petitioner, it cannot be said that imposing punishment of withholding increment for 10 years with future effect is in any way excessive. It is submitted that on the contrary despite past 23 defaults liberal view has been taken by the respondent by not dismissing the petitioner from service, and, therefore, it is requested to dismiss the present petition.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the fact that the charge and misconduct of recovering the amount and not issuing the tickets to the passengers has been proved and considering the fact that earlier there were 23 defaults in the account of the petitioner, it cannot be said that the disciplinary authority has committed any error and/or imposition of punishment of increment for 10 years with future effect is in any way excessive. It appears that on the contrary, the disciplinary authority has taken a liberal view in not dismissing the petitioner from service. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, when the industrial tribunal has dismissed the reference, confirming the order of punishment of the disciplinary authority withholding increment for 10 years with future effect, it cannot be said that the learned tribunal has committed any error and/or illegality in dismissing the said reference, which calls for the interference of this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

In view of the above, there is no substance in the present petition, which deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. No cost.