Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shankerling S/o Bharamappa Kattimani, was employed as a conductor with the respondent-Corporation (NWKRTC). On 04.09.2005, while he was discharging his duties as conductor in bus bearing Registration No.KA-29/F-359 plying between Bagalkot to Kumatagi, the bus was stopped near Benakatti station. The vigilance staff entered the bus and after conducting physical verification, recorded the presence of 18+1 passengers, out of which 8 persons were not issued tickets of the value of Rs.3/- each. An enquiry was conducted, and the petitioner was dismissed from service. The dismissal was challenged in KID No.9/2006 before the Labour Court, Bijapur, which dismissed the claim by award dated 28.02.2008. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for a writ of certiorari to set aside the Labour Court award and for reinstatement with full back wages and consequential benefits. The High Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the burden was on the workman to show that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper. The Labour Court had considered the evidence and found that the enquiry was fair and proper and that the misconduct was proved. The High Court held that the Labour Court's finding of fact was not perverse and did not warrant interference under Article 226. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Industrial Disputes - Dismissal from Service - Misconduct - Section 10(4)(A) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The petitioner, a conductor, was dismissed for failing to issue tickets to 8 passengers. The Labour Court dismissed his claim under Section 10(4)(A) of the Act. The High Court held that the burden was on the workman to show that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper, and the Labour Court's finding of misconduct based on evidence was not perverse. The writ petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court was justified in dismissing the claim of the petitioner under Section 10(4)(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and whether the award dated 28.02.2008 is liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The award of the Labour Court, Bijapur in KID No.9/2006 dated 28.02.2008 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on workman to show enquiry was not fair
- Labour Court's finding of fact not to be interfered with unless perverse
- Section 10(4)(A) of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (07) 83
W.P.No.80814/2012 (L-KSRTC)
Sri P. Vilas Kumar (for petitioner), Sri Subhash Mallapur (for respondent)
Shankerling S/o Bharamappa Kattimani
The Divisional Controller, NWKRTC, Bagalkot Division, Bagalkot
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the award of the Labour Court, Bijapur in KID No.9/2006 dated 28.02.2008 dismissing the claim of the petitioner.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to set aside the Labour Court award and reinstatement into service with full back wages and all other consequential benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was dismissed from service as conductor for alleged misconduct of not issuing tickets to 8 passengers. The Labour Court dismissed his claim, and he challenged that award.
Previous Decisions
The Labour Court, Bijapur, by award dated 28.02.2008 in KID No.9/2006, dismissed the claim of the petitioner under Section 10(4)(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Issues
Whether the Labour Court was justified in dismissing the claim of the petitioner under Section 10(4)(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?
Whether the award dated 28.02.2008 is liable to be set aside?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper and that the Labour Court erred in dismissing his claim.
Respondent supported the Labour Court award, contending that the enquiry was fair and the misconduct was proved.
Ratio Decidendi
The burden is on the workman to show that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper. The Labour Court's finding of fact based on evidence is not to be interfered with under Article 226 unless it is perverse. In this case, the Labour Court found the enquiry fair and the misconduct proved, and the High Court found no perversity.
Judgment Excerpts
The applicant in KID No.9/2006 on the file of Labour Court, Bijapur has come up in this petition impugning the award dated 28.02.2008 in dismissing his claim under Section 10(4)(A) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The said award of the Labour Court is under challenge in this writ petition.
Procedural History
The petitioner was dismissed from service after a domestic enquiry. He challenged the dismissal before the Labour Court, Bijapur in KID No.9/2006, which dismissed his claim by award dated 28.02.2008. Aggrieved, he filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 10(4)(A)
- Constitution of India: 226, 227
