HC approves dismissal of BMTC driver who was absent for 959 days

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: A division bench of the High Court has upheld the dismissal from service of a driver of the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) who was absent from service for 959 days. The Industrial Tribunal had held that the dismissal was wrong. A single-judge bench of the High Court had also ruled in favour of the driver.

But the division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty ruled in favour of the BMTC. The driver, BK Samangi was working in the BMTC Volvo division. He was unauthorisedly absent from May 1, 2009 to February 23, 2012.

The Disciplinary Authority of the BMTC had dismissed him on Febraury 23, 2012. The BMTC had filed an application for approval of the dismissal as per the Industrial Disputes Act, before the Industrial Tribunal in 2012.

In May 2018, the Tribunal had dismissed the application “on the ground that the dismissal of the workman from service was victimization and the employer had adopted unfair labour practice.” The BMTC approached the HC and its petition was dismissed by the single judge.

The appeal was filed in the HC in 2018 and the judgement came on October 11, 2022. In its judgement, the division bench said, “The respondent-workman had remained unauthorizedly absent for a period of 959 days and undisputedly during the aforesaid period he had not sought leave from the employer, based on his medical condition. Only after an enquiry was initiated against him with regard to his misconduct of unauthorised absents, he had filed representation to provide lighter work and to change the cadre.”

The division bench held that the Tribunal was wrong in its assessment. “The respondent has failed to produce any medical record either before the Enquiry Officer or before the Tribunal so as to establish that he was suffering from a disability of not less than 40% in terms of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 to consider his case either for providing a lighter work or for change of cadre.

The Tribunal, without appreciating this aspect of the matter, had arrived at a conclusion that there was an element of victimization and unfair labour practice while passing the order of dismissal from service against the workman.”