Page 1

1

                                                                        NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.  5846  OF 2014 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8394 of 2013]

U.P. State Road Transport Corporation & Anr.   ..            Appellant(s)

-vs-

Zahid Hussain ..         Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T C. NAGAPPAN, J.  

1 Leave granted.

2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order  

dated 12.9.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at  

Allahabad in Writ-C no.45914 of 2012.

3. The respondent herein was employed as driver in the  

appellants-Corporation  since  1980  and  disciplinary  

proceedings were initiated against him on the charges that

Page 2

2

he absented  from duty  from 1.7.1993  to  22.8.1993;  after  

joining  duty,  while  he  was  hauling  a  stranded  vehicle  

through  his  break  down  truck  on  13.9.1993,  he  carried  

passengers  on  the  said  truck  and  under  intoxication  he  

refused  to  attend  another  stranded  vehicle  of  the  

Corporation  and  demanded  money  from that  driver.   The  

Enquiry  Officer,  in  his  report,  found the  first  two  charges  

proved and the third charge partly proved and consequently,  

the  services  of  the  respondent  was  terminated  w.e.f.  

31.3.1999.   The  appeal  preferred  by  him  came  to  be  

dismissed on 10.2.2000.  At the instance of the respondent  

herein, a Reference was made to the Labour Court, Rampur  

with regard to the legality of the termination and the Labour  

Court  held  that  the  charges  were  not  proved  and  the  

termination  was  illegal  and  consequently,  directed  

reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.  

The  Corporation  challenged  the  award  by  filing  the  Writ  

Petition and the High Court after hearing both sides, upheld  

the award and dismissed the Writ Petition.  The Corporation  

challenged the said order by filing the Special Leave Petition

Page 3

3

and  this  Court  by  order  dated  11.2.2013  issued  notice  

limited to the award of back wages.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that  

the  respondent  herein  is  not  entitled  for  full  back  wages  

since  he has  not  worked during  the  relevant  period.   Per  

contra,  the  learned  counsel  for  the  respondent  submitted  

that the discretion exercised by the courts below to grant full  

back wages cannot be faulted with.  The respondent herein  

is a driver by profession and he has put in long service in the  

appellants-Corporation.  Considering  the  facts  and  

circumstances of the case, grant of 25% of back wages, in  

our view, would meet the ends of justice and it is decided  

accordingly.   

5. In the result, the respondent herein shall be entitled to  

25%  of  back  wages  alone  and  the  award  is  modified  

accordingly.  The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

       ...…………………………….J.       (T.S. Thakur)

...……….……………………J.       (C. Nagappan)

Page 4

4

New Delhi; June 30, 2014.