The Allahabad High Court has upheld the termination of a bus conductor who had carried 59 passengers without tickets and had failed to provide any reasonable explanation for the same. The High Court held that carrying a passenger without a ticket amounts to serious misconduct.

The petition before the High Court was filed by the aggrieved conductor.

The Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery held, “It is well settled that in cases of disciplinary proceedings, this Court cannot sit as Appellate Court to consider whether evidence was sufficient or not except in a case when findings are perverse which is not a case in hand. Carrying passengers without ticket is a serious misconduct and in this regard, Court takes note of above referred judgments and since petitioner has failed to provide any reasonable explanation that under which circumstances, without issue tickets to passengers, he could fill pay-bills in advance, therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with impugned order in limited writ jurisdiction…”

Advocate Diwakar Mishra represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Ajit Kumar Singh represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The petitioner was a Conductor with the respondent corporation. When he was discharging duties in a vehicle from Faizabad to Akbarpur, an inspection was conducted wherein it was found that he had not issued tickets to 59 passengers in the bus, though he had filled paybills. The petitioner was thus served with a charge sheet, and an inquiry report was submitted. Subsequently, a second show cause notice was issued, and an order of punishment was passed whereby the petitioner was terminated from service. The petitioner has filed a representation before the Regional Manager, and the matter was remitted back for fresh consideration.

The inquiry was conducted afresh, and the charge was found proved in part. The petitioner submitted a belated reply on September 1, 2009, whereas on the same day, the impugned order was passed, whereby a major punishment of termination from service was imposed. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Regional Manager, but the same was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The Bench, at the outset, referred to the judgment in MD, North-East Karnataka Road Transport Corpn. v. K. Murti, (2006) wherein it has been held that carrying passengers without a ticket is a serious misconduct which could invite major punishment of termination.

The Bench noticed that the petitioner was not able to deny that in normal circumstances, tickets are issued at first instance and paybills are filled subsequently, and not vice versa. “During inquiry, due process was followed. The petitioner was granted sufficient time to submit reply of notice of disagreement, however, he failed to do so”, it noted

The Bench found that the petitioner had failed to provide any reasonable explanation under which circumstances, without issuing tickets to passengers, he could fill pay-bills in advance. Thus, in the absence of any reason to interfere with the impugned order, the Bench dismissed the appeal.

Cause Title: Jagdamba Prasad Pandey v. State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:84410)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Diwakar Mishra, Raj Narayan Tiwari, Shyamdhar Pandey

Respondent: Advocate Ajit Kumar Singh, Chief Standing Counsel, Advocate Mritunjay Mohan Sahai

Click here to read/download Order