The Management, Vs The General Secretary

The General Secretary, Tamil Nadu Arasu Pokkuvarathu Kalaga Thozhilalar Sangam (CITU), Karaikudi Region, Koviloor Salai, Karaikudi, D.Devaprabhu (Service No. 14 DR 3057) ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the Labour Court, Madurai (Karaikudi Camp Court) pertaining to its proceedings in I.D No.55 of 2020 dated 20.08.2025 and quash the same.

¶12

1/6

¶13

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

¶14

W.P.(MD)No.17258 of 2026

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The petitioner challenges the award dated 20.08.2025 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madurai (Karaikudi Camp), in I.D. No.55 of 2020.

¶17

2.Heard Mr. S.C. Herold Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶18

3.A charge memo was issued to the workman, Mr. D. Devaprabhu, alleging that while he was serving as a Driver in the Ramanathapuram Mofussil Branch on 03.11.2017, he commenced a trip from Madurai to Ramanathapuram at about 4.10 p.m. When the bus reached Ariyanenthal, he allegedly stopped the bus and abandoned it without informing the Branch Office. The Conductor immediately informed the Branch about the incident. It was further alleged that, on account of the deliberate negligence of the workman, the Corporation suffered a loss of Rs.6,000/-.

¶19

4.The workman submitted his explanation denying the charges. As

¶20

2/6

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.(MD)No.17258 of 2026

¶23

the explanation was found unsatisfactory, a domestic enquiry was conducted. Pursuant thereto, the charge was held proved and the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of six months with cumulative effect was imposed.

¶24

5.Aggrieved by the said punishment, the workman, through his

¶25

Union, raised an industrial dispute under Sections 10(1)(c) and 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

¶26

6.The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶27

materials available on record have been duly considered.

¶28

7.The Labour Court, in the impugned award, noted the explanation

¶29

offered by the workman that, while on duty on 03.11.2017, he experienced giddiness and, in order to avoid an accident, immediately halted the bus, called the 108 Ambulance Service, and thereafter underwent treatment at the Government Hospital, Paramakudi. The workman had also produced medical slips, a medical certificate, and a fitness certificate in support of his case.

¶30

3/6

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.17258 of 2026

¶33

8.The Labour Court further took note of the report of the Branch

¶34

Manager, wherein it was stated that the workman had halted the bus, called the 108 Ambulance Service, and was admitted to the Government Hospital, Paramakudi. The said fact was also confirmed by the Supervisor of the Paramakudi Branch. The report further disclosed that the workman had suffered giddiness due to a drop in his sugar level. The Labour Court also considered the medical certificate issued by the Hospital.

¶35

9.Upon consideration of the aforesaid materials, the Labour Court arrived at a finding that the workman had not deliberately halted the bus without informing the Branch Office, but had done so on account of illhealth. Accordingly, it held that the act complained of did not amount to misconduct.

¶36

10.The findings recorded by the Labour Court are based on evidence available on record and cannot be said to be unsupported by evidence. In the absence of any perversity, arbitrariness, or patent

¶37

4/6

¶38

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

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.17258 of 2026

¶40

award.

¶41

illegality, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned award.

¶42

11.In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed.