Dismissal based solely on media reports without independent verification or departmental inquiry is legally unsustainable.

The respondent, a driver with the petitioner (MSRTC), was involved in a road accident on 31.07.2019 while driving a corporation bus

Following the accident, television and newspaper reports alleged that the respondent was driving in an intoxicated state

Relying solely on these media reports, MSRTC invoked Clause 6(1) of its Discipline and Appeal Rules and dismissed the respondent from service without conducting a departmental inquiry

The respondent challenged the dismissal in the Labour Court, which found the dismissal violative of the principles of natural justice and the corporation's own rules, subsequently ordering reinstatement with 50% back wages

This order was upheld by the Industrial Court in revision

The petitioner approached the High Court challenging these concurrent findings.

1. Whether the petitioner was justified in dismissing the respondent without a departmental inquiry by invoking Clause 6(1) of the Discipline and Appeal Rules based on unverified media reports

2. Whether the lower courts erred in granting 50% back wages to the respondent

The court primarily interpreted Clauses 5 and 6 of the MSRTC Discipline and Appeal Rules

Clause 5 mandates a detailed inquiry procedure involving a charge sheet, written defense, and recording of evidence

Clause 6 provides specific exceptions where a full inquiry may be dispensed with, such as when an employee admits guilt (Clause 6(1)), is convicted by a criminal court (Clause 6(2)), or is absconding (Clause 6(3))

The court also applied the fundamental Principles of Natural Justice, which require that no person be condemned unheard without a fair inquiry into the truthfulness of allegations

The court observed that MSRTC’s reliance on Clause 6(1) was misplaced because the respondent had never admitted to the alleged guilt

The petitioner conceded that the dismissal was based entirely on news items flashed on television and published in newspapers, without any independent inquiry conducted by the corporation to confirm the veracity of those reports

The court reasoned that since the truthfulness of the misconduct was never established through the prescribed procedural safeguards, the summary dismissal was illegal

Regarding the challenge to back wages, the court found that the petitioner failed to place any convincing material on record to demonstrate that the findings of the Labour and Industrial Courts were perverse or erroneous

The court further noted with serious concern that MSRTC had failed to reinstate the respondent despite the 2021 order, characterizing this inaction as a "contemptuous act"

The court held that media reports cannot substitute for a formal inquiry under the Discipline and Appeal Rules unless the specific exceptions in Clause 6 are strictly met

The petitioner was directed to reinstate the respondent within four weeks and clear all payable back wages as per the lower courts' orders within two weeks

The court warned that default in compliance would result in serious consequences and scheduled the matter for confirmation of compliance on 22.04.2026