Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Jul 19, 2006
Google



National
News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |

National Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Misappropriation liable for dismissal: court

Legal Correspondent

``Loss of confidence is the primary factor and not the amount of money misappropriated''


  • Judicial forums cannot interfere with the quantum of punishment in such cases
  • Bus conductors function in a fiduciary capacity

    New Delhi: When an employee is found guilty of misappropriation of funds, even if it is a paltry amount, the employer can dismiss him from service, the Supreme Court has held.

    A Bench of Justices A.R. Lakshmanan and Lokeshwar Singh Panta said, ``in such cases, there is no place for generosity or misplaced sympathy on the part of the judicial forums and interfering with the quantum of punishment."

    Referring to the contention that the misappropriation of funds by the delinquent employee was only Rs. 360.95, the Bench said: "The loss of confidence is the primary factor and not the amount of money misappropriated and that the sympathy or generosity cannot be a factor which is impermissible in law."

    Mr. Justice Lakshmanan said, ``When an employee is found guilty of pilferage or of misappropriating corporation's funds, there is nothing wrong in the corporation losing confidence or faith in such an employee and awarding the punishment of dismissal." H.

    Amaresh, working as a bus conductor in a road transport corporation in Karnataka, was dismissed from service on charge of misappropriating Rs. 360.95. He was also found in a drunken condition.

    The Labour Court found him guilty of the charge but ordered his reinstatement with 75 per cent back wages.

    On appeal from the corporation, a single judge and a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court affirmed the labour court's order but quashed the findings on back wages. The present appeal by the corporation was directed against the Division Bench judgment.

    The apex court held that the proved acts of misconduct, either to a case of dishonesty or of gross negligence by bus conductors, who by their actions and inactions caused financial loss to the corporation irrespective of the quantum, ought not to be retained in service.

    The Bench noted that conductors functioned in a fiduciary capacity and it would be a case of gross misconduct if knowingly they did not collect any fare or the correct amount of fare or misappropriated the funds.

    Printer friendly page  
    Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



    National

    News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
    Advts:
    Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |


  • News Update


    The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
    Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

    Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu