The Management Vs The Secretary

The Secretary Tamil Nadu Arasu Polluvarathu Kazhaga Thozhiilar Podhunala Amaipu Sangam, (Regd.No.161/SVG/2019), Plot No.1595/169A, Srinivasa Nagar, 6th Cross Street, Thondi main Road, Sivagangai District - 630 561.

¶11

..Respondent

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the Award dated 07.11.2025 passed in O.P.No.34/2022 by the Principal Labour Court, Chennai and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vinothraj

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Management (Transport Corporation) has filed this Writ Petition

¶16

praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the Award dated 07.11.2025 passed in O.P.No.34 of 2022 by the Principal

¶17

Page1 of 5

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

WP No. 27554 of 2026

¶20

Labour Court, Chennai and quash the same.

¶21

Brief facts:

¶22

One Mr.A.Srimurugan was a member of the petitioner/Transport Corporation's Labour Union. He entered into service on 29.11.2010. He was charged under the following four heads:

¶23

(i) On 21.08.2017 in Route No.S71E/D1/AS when Mr.A.Srimurugan worked as the Conductor in the bus No.AMI 2543 instead of operating the bus for 8+2 singles, did only 7+2 singles and stopped the bus at Ambattur Estate instead of reaching Broadway.

¶24

(ii) The workman used unnecessary obscene words in the Transport Report.

¶25

(iii) The workman had abused the Driver of the bus, Time Keepers and quarrelled in the Computer Section.

¶26

(iv) The workman used obscene words against the passengers and lowered the reputation of the Corporation.

¶27

Thereafter, a charge-memo was issued. However, since there was no explanation to the charge-memo, the Management, without conducting any enquiry, has imposed the punishment of postponement of the annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect.

¶28

Page2 of 5

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

WP No. 27554 of 2026

¶31

Since there was no reply regarding the proposed punishment, the said punishment was confirmed by the Management.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner/Management/Transport Corporation submitted that enquiry was not conducted, only for the reason of the Conductor not replying to the show cause notice issued to the delinquent.

¶33

For the said reason of no reply having been filed by the delinquent, the enquiry was conducted, however, on the basis of the charges levelled against him, the said punishment was imposed. Since there was no reply regarding the proposed punishment, the said punishment was confirmed by the petitioner/Management.

¶34

The punishment imposed on the delinquent, is a major punishment and it had adversely affected his career and other monetary benefits not being paid. In the absence of any enquiry being conducted, the petitioner/Management has violated the principles of natural justice and no witness was examined, nor any document produced, to substantiate the charges levelled against the Conductor of the bus.

¶35

In such a case, the question of imposing the punishment, does not arise.

¶36

Page3 of 5

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

WP No. 27554 of 2026

¶39

The Labour Court has rightly allowed O.P.No.34 of 2022, setting aside the punishment that was imposed on the said Conductor.

¶40

This Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Management. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed in the admission stage itself, taking into consideration and facts and circumstances of the case.

¶41