Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

U.P.S.R.T.C. versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


U.P.S.R.T.C. v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 622 of 1997 [2006] RD-AH 2211 (27 January 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court no. 31

Civil Misc. Writ Petition no. 622 of 1997

U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. State of U.P. & ors.

..

Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.

This petition was filed against an award of the Labour Court dated 23.5.1996 by which the respondent workman had been reinstated with full back wages.

The petitioner corporation challenged the impugned award on various grounds including misconduct. The petitioner corporation had charge-sheeted the respondent workman who was a conductor because he was found guilty of not realizing fare and permitting 15 passengers to travel without tickets. Labour court however came to a conclusion that misconduct was not proved and reinstated the workman with full back wages.

This Hon'ble Court by its interim order dated 10.1.1997 reinstated the respondent workman but stayed back wages.

Learned counsel for the respondent informs the Court that the respondent workman has been superannuated in the month of Jan., 2005. Therefore the question of his reinstatement no longer survives. However I think that it would be in the interest of justice that the workman who was already charged as guilty for the misconduct of carrying passengers without tickets, should not be paid full back wages. I accordingly modify the award of the Labour Court to the extent that only 50% of the back wages payable to the workman shall be given to him, within a period of three months of production of a certified copy of this order.

The writ petition is, partly allowed. There will be no order as to costs.

Dated  27.1.2006

Rk.622.97-12


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.