9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iation of goods for the value given in the said charges had been clearly established. Apparently, it would bean unjustified direction to reinstate an employee against whom charge of misappropriation is established. A proved act of misappropriation cannot be taken lightly even though number of such misappropriation cases remain undisclosed and such employees or others amass wealth by such means. In any case, misappropriation cannot be rewarded or legalised by reinstatement in service with full or part of back wages. 4. The matrix of the facts as culled out from the case are that the appellant is a Cooperative Society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, The Management charged four of its employees, namely Smt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... men are proved. After recording evidence and hearing both the sides the Labour Court vide its award dated 30-1-1995 held that the charges of breach of trust and misappropriation by the employees were proved. However, the Labour Court in exercise of its discretionary power under Section 11A of the Act ordered their reinstatement with 25% of back wages. The Labour Court further ordered for continuity of their service by imposing penalty of stoppage of 5 increments with cumulative effect and for fixing their pay on the basis of imposition of such penalty from the date of their dismissal till the date of reinstatement. Against the award of the Labour Court, both the parties filed writ petitions before the High Court of Karnataka. The Learned Si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice and reinstating them with 25% back wages. Once act of misappropriation is proved, may be for a small or large amount, there is no question of showing uncalled for sympathy and reinstating the employees in service. Law on this point is well settled. [Re.: Municipal Committee, Bahadurgarh v. Krishnan Behari and Ors. ]. In U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Basudeo Chaudhary and Anr. this Court set aside the judgment passed by the High Court in a case where a conductor serving with the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation was removed from service on the ground that alleged misconduct of the conductor was attempt to cause loss of ₹ 65/- to the Corporation by issuing tickets to 23 passengers fro a sum of ₹ 2.35 but recove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
