[2026:RJ-JP:5467] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13526/2025 Chief Manager, Rajasthan Transport Corporation, Banswara. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Narpath Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh, Conductor, Resident Of Gram Sarwadi, Via- Losal, Post- Sarwadi, District- Sikar, (Rajasthan).(Died During Proceedings) 1/1. Smt. Radha Kanwar W/o Late Shri Narpath Singh, Resident Of Gram Sarwadi, Via- Losal, Post-Sarwadi, District- Sikar, (Rajasthan). 1/2. Shri Prithviraj S/o Late Shri Narpath Singh, Resident Of Gram Sarwadi, Via- Losal, Post-Sarwadi, District- Sikar, (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Inderjeet Deora For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 05/02/2026 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Banswara, against order dated 11.12.2024 passed by Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, ‘Tribunal’), whereby application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘the Act of 1947’) has been dismissed. 2. It is stated that the deceased employee, since committed misconduct of carrying passenger without ticket, therefore, two charge-sheets bearing No. 664 & 1818 were issued to him on 24.04.1994 & 01.09.1995 respectively. Pursuant to such [2026:RJ-JP:5467] (2 of 4) [CW-13526/2025] charge-sheets, enquiry was conducted by the Corporation and after granting complete opportunity of hearing to the employee, penalty order of removal from service was inflicted upon the employee on 02.09.1997. 3. Petitioner-Corporation thereafter filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947 for seeking approval of the penalty order of removal from service. However, during the pendency of such proceedings the employee-Narpath Singh expired on 28.06.2017. He was substituted by the legal representatives, who contested the application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947 on behalf of deceased employee. 4. During proceedings, the enquiry conducted by the petitioner in respect of charge-sheet No.664 was held to be unfair and improper and the enquiry pursuant to charge-sheet No.1818 was held to be fair and proper vide order dated 10.10.2024. After holding the enquiry pursuant to charge-sheet No.664, the Corporation was granted opportunity to prove the charges, however, despite placing sufficient evidence on record, as per petitioner, the application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947 has been rejected vide order dated 11.12.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 11.12.2024 has been passed by learned Tribunal without properly appreciating the facts of the case, material on record and law prevailing at the relevant time. He further submits that learned Tribunal has committed serious error of law and jurisdiction in substituting the view and opinion of the Disciplinary Authority and has given finding ignoring the fundamental principle that during enquiry the employer is supposed to prove the charges [2026:RJ-JP:5467] (3 of 4) [CW-13526/2025] on the basis of preponderance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that so far as charge-sheet No.1818, the enquiry proceedings has been held to be fair and proper, hence, under these circumstances, there was no impediment in the way of learned Tribunal in granting approval to the petitioner. 7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 8. It is not in dispute that much before passing any order on fairness and propriety of the enquiry proceedings, the employee died in the year 2017 and the order with regard to fairness was passed on 10.10.2024. So far as, charge-sheet No.664 is concerned, as the enquiry was held to be unfair and improper, the petitioner-Corporation was required to prove the charges before the learned Tribunal, however, after death of the employee, in the light of judgment delivered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11791/2015 (Girdhari Karmachandani (Dead) vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors.) decided on 04.02.2025, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.324/2010 (Nand Lal Raigar & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 14.02.2024 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2277/2008 (S.V. Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) decided on 27.02.2025, no enquiry can be proceeded further after death of the delinquent employee. 9. Even otherwise on bare perusal of the order dated 11.12.2024 would reveal that the evidence led by the petitioner has been meticulously analyzed and examined by the learned [2026:RJ-JP:5467] (4 of 4) [CW-13526/2025] Tribunal and a finding has arrived at that the petitioner has failed to prove Exhibit M/1 to M/3, on account of not producing the concerned witness the factum of negligence in not issuing tickets to the passenger was also not proved by the petitioner by producing conclusive evidence. Under these circumstances, factual finding has been arrived at by the learned Tribunal which cannot be interfered in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. 10. In view of above, writ petition filed by the petitioner is bereft of any merit and substance and the same, is hereby, dismissed. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/32