9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a charge sheet on 8th September 1992 alleging that while discharging duties as a conductor on a particular route, he collected a sum of Rs.4/ from two passengers, but failed to issue tickets to them. After enquiry, the respondent passed an order of removal of the appellant from service with effect from 14th June 1996. 2. The respondent raised an Industrial Dispute before the Labour Court and challenged the enquiry and consequent order of removal. The Labour Court, after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that the enquiry was illegal. Therefore, the Labour Court permitted the respondent to adduce evidence. By the award dated 17th March 2009, the Labour Court came to the conclusion that the charge against the appellant was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent. He would, therefore, submit that in the facts of the case, the appellant discharged the burden on him by proving that he did not have any employment after his removal from service by the respondent. He submitted that there is no evidence to the contrary and therefore, the appellant is entitled to full back wages. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent pointed out that before the Labour Court, on 18th July 2008, an affidavit was filed by the appellant in which there was an assertion that the appellant was unemployed from the date of his termination and was not able to secure any employment. However, the said affidavit was withdrawn and a fresh affidavit was filed in which no such specific assertion was incorporated. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the appellant before the Labour Court on 8th August 1997, which is duly signed and verified by him, a specific contention was raised that he was still unemployed and has been rendered jobless. Therefore, a contention was raised in paragraph 9 of the statement that the appellant was entitled to back wages. Therefore, at least as on 8th August 1997, there is a specific case made out by the appellant that he was not gainfully employed. The appellant filed an affidavit on 18th July 2008 before the Labour Court in which he contended that he was unemployed from the date of termination and was facing acute financial hardship. However, the said affidavit was withdrawn and a fresh affidavit of evidence was filed by the appellant on 4th Septe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aspect is that there is a cross-examination of the appellant on this issue by the Advocate for the respondent and in the cross-examination, the appellant denied that he had a sufficient source of income to look after his family. However, considering the conduct of the appellant of withdrawing the affidavit filed earlier and not raising the contention of unemployment in the fresh affidavit, the appellant cannot be granted the benefit of back wages for the entire period from the date of termination till reinstatement. It is not possible to accept that for the entire period of thirteen years, the appellant had no source of income. However, the respondent has not come out with the case that from the date of his removal from service, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
