1986 PLP 838 (PLC)

Gul Muhammad Soomro for Appellant. M. Ashraf Khan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 6th February, 1986. This is an appeal against the order of Sind Labour Court No. I, Karachi who passed the order‑on 24‑8‑1985, allowing the application under section 25‑A, I.R.O., 1969, of the Conductor, Abdul Hameed.

2. Abdul Hameed was employed as a Conductor with the appellant

Corporation. On 2012‑1984, while he was on duty on the Bus No.135, a checking party checked the bus and found 51 passengers travelling without tickets. Accordingly T.T. 40 was prepared at the spot and the respondent was charge‑sheeted. The respondent's reply to the charge sheet was found unsatisfactory. This was followed by the domestic enquiry as a result of which he was dismissed from service. The contention is that the domestic enquiry was not held in accordance with law and he was condemned unheard.

3. The stand of the appellant‑Corporation in their reply statement is that the bus left Keamari for Nusrat Bhutto Colony, but the respondent unauthorizedly managed to turn back the said bus from Tower to Keamari. He picked up 51 passengers from Tower to Keamari and realized fare from them at the rate of 60 paisas per ticket but did not issue tickets to them. However, the checking party during the checking operation realized the fare amount through ticketless passengers who were also confronted to respondent, Abdul Hameed. Subsequently, a domestic enquiry was held and the respondent was dismissed.

4. I have heard the counsel of the parties. The only point is whether the dismissal of the respondent was proper in view of the evidence and the circumstances. In the evidence, only Reporter, Raqib Gul was examined. The bus came upto Tower and turned back to Keamari carrying 51 passengers. It is not clear as‑ to why the bus went back to Keamari from Tower. The Conductor in a question divulged that the diver said that some Hangama (disturbance) was going on at the Tower. The bus presumably went from Tower at Keamari and carried 51 passengers.' It is not known that these 51 passenger wanted to go to Keamari or from Tower to town. If the Hangama was going on in the area of Tower, then, why the bus went to Keamari which is 2 miles away from Tower. These facts are not known. But, the bus was checked on coming from Keamari to Tower. The version of the conductor is that the bus was in fact turned towards Keamari because they received news that law and order situation was at the Tower. The 51 passengers were yet to be charged and they had not enough of time and in the meantime the checking party had checked the bus at Bus Stop No.15, Keamari. The checking party did not check the cash of the respondent which he carried with him to determine whether the amount was charged from the passengers and the tickets were not issued. After going through the record, I find that the checking party checked the bus while yet the Conductor was going to issue tickets to the passengers. B In the domestic enquiry, no passenger was confronted with the conductor and the evidence with regard to the fact that the tickets were not given to the passengers and money was charged. Such an evidence is lacking. The conclusion drawn in the domestic enquiry was therefore, wrong. Without establishing the factum that passengers were charged and the tickets were not issued, no case is made out against the conductor. The safest course is that in the domestic enquiry some passengers may be examined.

5. The conclusion drawn by the Labour Court is correct and I need not interfere with the impugned order. I uphold the order of the learned Labour Court and dismiss this appeal. A.E. Appeal dismissed.