1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar in Reference (IT) No.144/1999 dated 23.11.2004, whereby, the petitioner was directed to pay all the consequential benefit to the respondent and set aside the order of punishment.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent was charge sheeted for disciplinary proceedings in relation to an incident that had occurred on 07.02.1981 where the respondent was allegedly found to have committed certain irregularities in the issuance of tickets. Ultimately, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of stoppage of seven increments with permanent effect. Against the said order, the first appeal preferred by the respondent was rejected vide order dated 03.08.1994.
2.1. Thereafter again the respondent was chargesheeted for disciplinary proceedings in relation to an incident that had occurred on 03.11.1994 where the respondent was allegedly found to have committed certain irregularities in the issuance of tickets. Ultimately, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service, vide order dated 11.10.1995. The first appeal filed before the appellate authority came to be partly allowed and the order of dismissal was modified to the extent of stoppage of five increments with permanent effect. In the second appeal, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal vide order dated 17.11.1997.
3. Against the said order, the respondent raised a dispute, which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar for adjudication. The Tribunal, after hearing both the sides, allowed the reference by way of the impugned award. Hence, this petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The respondent was found guilty of serious irregularity / misconduct on 24 different occasions in the past. Of these defaults, many defaults related to incidents of similar nature. In spite of being found guilty of similar defaults in the past, the respondent did not improve his behaviour and continued to commit such misconduct, which is highly unbecoming of a public servant.
5. Looking to the facts of the case and the past record of the respondent, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal ought not to have completely set aside the order of punishment, as it would amount to granting premium to a wrongdoer. In my opinion, if the penalty of stoppage of Four Increments with future effect is imposed on the respondent, the same would meet with the ends of justice. Orders accordingly. The impugned award stands modified accordingly. The order to be implemented within a period of six months from today. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the above extent with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) /phalguni/