Sri A. Srinivas vs The Management of BMTC

H.N. Nagamohan Das

In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the award dated 10.11.2010 in I.D. No. 63/2009 passed by the Labour Court at Bangalore.

Petitioner is a Driver cum Conductor in the respondent Corporation. On 18.6.2006, the petitioner was in drunken state during working hours while he was on duty. For this misconduct, articles of charges were issued, enquiry was held and he was dismissed from service on 12.11.2008. Aggrieved by this order of dismissal, the petitioner raised a dispute before the Labour Court u/s 10(4-A) of the I.D. Act. On the basis of pleadings, the Labour Court framed the following issues:

i) Whether the IInd party proves that the DE is fair and proper?

ii) Whether the enquiry Officer is justified in holding that the misconduct is proved?

iii) Whether the disciplinary authority is justified in dismissing the Ist party from service?

iv) To what award or order the parties entitled?

On the preliminary issue relating to domestic enquiry, respondent adduced evidence and produced certain documents. At this stage, the petitioner filed a memo on 16.7.2010 conceding the domestic enquiry. Thereafter the Labour Court on reappreciation of the entire material on record found that the charge levelled against the petitioner as proved. But by exercising discretion u/s 11A of the Act the Labour Court set-aside the order of dismissal and directed reinstatement of petitioner with continuity of service, withholding of two increments and without backwages. In compliance of the award, the respondents have reinstated the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved by the impugned award in so far as it relates to denial of backwages and consequential benefits is before this court.

Payment of backwages is not a matter of right. From the date of dismissal till the date of impugned award, petitioner has not worked in the respondent''s establishment and absolutely there is no contribution by him. The charge levelled against the petitioner is proved. In the circumstances, the Labour Court denied the backwages and consequential benefits. I find no justifiable ground to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed without reference to respondent.