Dismissed

D.M.,Apsrtc,Parvathipuram v. G.Gowri Shankar Rao,Parvathipuramandanr

Telangana HC15 Nov 2018WP/6909/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this premature maintenance or listing order, Justice Shavili dismissed a writ petition filed by APSRTC seeking to quash a Labour Court award. The Court held that without pointing out specific illegality in the award under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the writ court cannot interfere.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ petition stand closed.

D.M.,Apsrtc,Parvathipuram Vs G.Gowri… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶2

W.P.No.6909 of 2003

¶3

ORDER

¶4

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the record relating to and connected with I.D.No.11 of 2000(S) on the file of the 2^nd respondent and quash the award dated 04.10.2001 passed therein holding it as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

Heard Sri Y.Vivekananda Swamy, learned Standing counsel for APSRTC appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Labour appearing on behalf of the 2^nd respondent.

¶6

It has been contended by the petitioner-Corporation that the 1^st respondent workman was appointed as Conductor in the Corporation and while he was discharging his duties on 13.05.1998, the checking officials of the Corporation conducted check and alleged that he indulged in cash and ticket irregularities. The respondent-Corporation construing the said act as misconduct initiated disciplinary proceedings against the 1^st respondent, and after conducting enquiry, imposed punishment of removal from service. Challenging the same, the 1^st respondent unsuccessfully preferred an appeal and a review before the competent authorities and, thereafter, raised

¶7

¶8

an industrial dispute in I.D.No.11/2000(S) on the file of the 2^nd respondent–Labour Court under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court without properly appreciating any of the contentions raised by the Corporation, passed an award dated 4.10.2001 setting aside the order of removal and directing the Corporation to reinstate the 1^st respondent into service with minor penalty of stoppage annual grade increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect and with back wages. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed.

¶9

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the 2^nd respondent has contended that the Labour Court has rightly passed the award in favour of the 1^st respondent and, therefore, no interference is called for.

¶10

This Court, having considered the submissions made by

¶11

the learned counsel for the parties, is of the considered view that when once the Labour Court had exercised the power under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, unless and until any illegality or irregularity is pointed out by the learned standing counsel for the petitioner-Corporation in the Award passed by the Labour Court, this Court cannot interfere with the Award. There are no merits in the writ petition.

¶12

¶13

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶14

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶15

in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶16

_____________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶17

15^th November, 2018

¶18

rkk

D.M.,Apsrtc,Parvathipuram v. G.Gowri Shankar Rao,Parvathipuramandanr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.M.,Apsrtc,Parvathipuram v. G.Gowri Shankar Rao,Parvathipuramandanr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Shankaraiah, Sangareddy, Medak Dist. Vs a.P.S.R.T.C., Rep.by Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyd.

Joint Action Committee, Nellore Vs the Apsrtc, Nellore

S.K.Mastan Vs the Regional Manager

The Chairma, Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Vs Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

Naseem Sultana Vs Chief Executive Officer Wakf Board

Mulla Hasan Ali Vs the Chairman and Managing Director, a.P.S.D.C.Ltd