1. This petition is directed against the award dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in reference (LCA)No. 85/2006 (Old Reference No. 551 of 2005) whereby the Labour Court by quashing and setting aside the dismissal order dated 02.08.2002 passed by the corporation has directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent with continuity of service. The Labour Court has also imposed a penalty of stoppage of two increments with future effect.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent was working with the petitioner corporation as a conductor. On 06.02.2001, the respondent was found to have misappropriated some amount by way of tampering with the tickets. The respondent was therefore issued with a charge- sheet and a departmental inquiry was initiated against him. He was thereafter dismissed from service, at the conclusion of inquiry, after the charge levelled against him was proved. Being aggrieved by the said dismissal, the respondent preferred reference before the Labour Court. The Labour Court after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
3. Ms. Mandavia, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Labour Court has not considered the fact that the petitioner corporation has incurred huge financial loss due to the misconduct of the respondent workman. She submitted that the respondent is a habitual offender and stoppage of two increments is on a lower side. She submitted that there are 69 defaults committed by the respondent as per the default card.
4. Mr. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate appearing for the respondent has supported the award passed by the labour court and submitted that the same being just and proper does not call for any interference by this Court.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through the award of the Labour Court and the evidence available on record. From the award it appears that the Labour Court has gone through the evidence in detail and has passed the award while exercising powers under Section 11A of the Act. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Labour Court. The Labour Court has observed that the findings arrived at by the inquiry officer are not in accordance with the evidence on record.
5.1 The Labour Court has reinstated the respondent workman without any backwages and instead imposed punishment of stoppage of two increments with future effect. However, the said punishment seems to be on lower side. Considering 69 defaults on the part of respondent workman, for having a deterrent effect on him, punishment of stoppage of 13 increments ought to have been imposed upon the respondent workman.
6. In the premises aforesaid, petition is partly allowed.
Punishment of stoppage of thirteen (13) increments with future effect shall be imposed upon the respondent workman. The respondent workman shall be reinstated within a period of one month from today. The award of the Labour court is modified accordingly. The legal dues permissible and admissible to the respondent shall be paid by the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the writ of the order of this Court.
7. It is clarified that for the period pursuant to 09.04.2008 (on which date the order qua compliance of section 17-B was passed by this court) no salary shall be claimed by the respondent workman since reinstatement is granted with continuity of service. However, for the period prior to 09.04.2008, the respondent workman shall be entitled to regular salary if not yet paid by the petitioner corporation. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted to both the sides.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) divya