IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 17538 OF 2012 Between: The Divisional Manager, APSRTC,, Kakinada, East Godavari District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal-cum -Industrial Tribunal-cum, Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, Rep by its Presiding Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 2. The Depot Secretary, APSRTC United Workers Union,, Tuni, East Godavari District Rep by Sri R.R. Purushotham, Conductor, E-358746.. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in the form of Writ of Certiorari (a) call for the records pertaining to and related to award passed by the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour one Court, Visakhapatnam in I.D. No. 84 of 2008 dated 30.08.2011 and quash set aside the same by declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law as the corporation has conducted the enquiry duly following the procedure prescribed in the corporation regulations; and (b) consequently declare that the 2nd respondent is not entitled for any relief except the modification passed by the appellate authority since the 2nd respondent committed misconduct %a: N6: 1 OF 2012fWPMP. NO: 22466 OF 2012} ^ ' Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in the award passed by the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in I.D. No. 84 of 2008 dated 30.8.2011 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the Respondents: E MADAN MOHAN RAO The Court made the following: Order or APHC010466942012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 17538/2012 Between: ...PETITIONER The Divisional Manager, Apsrtc, AND The Honble Industrial Tribunalcum Industrial Tribunalcum ...RESPONDENT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LABOUR 2.E MADAN MOHAN RAO The Court made the following: ORDER:- The petitioner is challenging the award passed by the Labour Court, Visakhapatnam in I.D.No.84 of 2008 dated 30.08.2011. 2. The 2 respondent was working as a conductor and was involved in cash and ticket irregularity on 04.11.2005. An enquiry was conducted, and the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of removal from proceedings dated 27.03.2006. The appeal preferred by the 2 service vide nd respondent before the appellate authority, the appellate authority modified the punishment by imposing the punishment of reduction of his pay by two incremental stages with permanent effect besides treating the period from the date of his removal till the date of reporting for duty as not on duty. Aggrieved by the said punishment, the 2""^ respondent filed I.D.No.84 of 2008 before the Labour Court, Visakhapatnam. The Labour Court passed an award dated 30.08.2011, modifying the punishment into Censure. 3. The petitioner has challenged the award on the preliminary ground that the Labour Court has erred in modifying the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority. It is submitted that the petitioner was found guilty of serious misconduct i.e. cash and ticket irregularity. A proper enquiry was also conducted, which was also ignored by the Labour Court. A perusal of the award would indicate that the error committed by the 2""' respondent is that the 2'''' respondent had collected an amount of Rs.23/- from However, issued a ticket worth Rs.21/-. a passenger. 3 4, Considering the nature of the allegation against the 2^"^ respondent, the Labour Court has modified the punishment into Censure. 5. The Labour Court has also recorded the details with regard to the allegation against the 2^^^ respondent and gave a finding that the punishment of Censure would be an appropriate punishment. Considering the facts and circumstances in the case, the Labour Court has passed a detailed award based on the documentary evidence submitted, as well as the enquiry report. This Court finds no grounds to interfere with the well-considered award. It is a matter of fact that the 2^^ respondent was ticket worth Rs.21/- after collecting an amount of the trivial nature of the complaint against the 2 6. charged with issuing a Rs.23/-. Considering respondent, the punishment imposed by the Labour Court, which modified the punishment of the disciplinary authority, does not warrant any interference by nd this Court. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/-SHAIKMOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT] REGISTRAR se6ton'^icer As a //TRUE COPY// To, 1. One CC to SRI VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC) Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR LABOUR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. One CC to SRI E MADAN MOHAN RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:27/01/2025 ORDER ANOrt^ 0^ S 0 5 MAK 2025 m WP.No.17538 of 2012 * Currem secuon . ^ WRIT PETITION IS DISMISSED