' This appeal arises from the decision dated 14-2-1979 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No,6, Rawalpindi, whereby the grievance petition of the respondent was accepted and he was directed to be reinstated in service without back benefits.
2. The allegations against the respondent were that he had realized fare from five passengers but had not issued tickets to them and had in his possession excessive cash of Rs,28. The remaining charges were to the effect that neither the respondent had realised fare, nor had issued tickets to the other passengers. As the respondent has committed only two misconducts, whereas according to the charge-sheet and the enquiry report, he had committed misconduct on four counts, the dismissing authority was obviously prejudiced while determining the quantum of dismissal. He considered that the respondent had committed four offences, therefore, he should not be spared. If he had been charge-sheeted for committing two misconducts, the possibility cannot be excluded that the dismissing authority may have prescribed some other punishment but not dismissal. In these circumstances, the respondent was rightly directed to be reinstated in service by the learned trial Judge without back benefits. There is no force in the appeal, which is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.