Begin typing your search...

TNSTC dismisses conductor for excess Rs 7 in bag; HC orders to reinstate him in service

The court also directed the State government to reinstate him in the service within six weeks with the attendance benefits. Justice PB Balaji’s order came after the employee approached the court seeking to quash the dismissal order by the TNSTC

TNSTC dismisses conductor for excess Rs 7 in bag; HC orders to reinstate him in service
X

Madras High Court

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has quashed an order issued by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) dismissing a conductor for carrying an additional Rs Seven in his work bag.

The court also directed the State government to reinstate him in the service within six weeks with the attendance benefits. Justice PB Balaji’s order came after the employee approached the court seeking to quash the dismissal order by the TNSTC.

The conductor was allegedly accused of failing to issue a ticket to a lady passenger after receiving Rs 5. Later, an excess of Rs 7 was found in his money bag. According to the petitioner’s counsel, the TNSTC terminated the service of the petitioner taking into account the earlier charges against him, for which the petitioner was already punished.

Further, the petitioner was removed from the service without even affording to present his case, said the counsel. The counsel who appeared for TNSTC said the inquiry officer has not violated any law and the petitioner was afforded a fair opportunity to present his case. After the submissions, Justice said that it is really surprising that in respect of such a charge, the respondent has removed the petitioner from service by imposing a maximum penalty.

Further, the Justice said, “It is needless to state that in such cases of charges of be it Rs.7/- or Rs.2/- no malafide or malice can be imputed and the same could have even been the result of an inadvertent act of the petitioner.” “The punishment meted out is grossly disproportionate to the offence and it shakes the conscience of the Court. Moreover, this court does not appreciate this procedure adopted by the TNSTC by referring to earlier concluded proceedings for holding the latest charge against the petitioner.” The court said.

DTNEXT Bureau
Next Story