Carrying Passengers Without Tickets Is Serious Misconduct: Allahabad High Court Upholds Termination Of Bus Conductor
The Allahabad High Court has upheld the dismissal of a bus conductor for carrying 59 passengers without ticket, stating that it is a serious misconduct.Petitioner was a conductor of the bus plying from Faizabad to Akbarpur. Upon inspection, it was found that 59 passengers on the bus were travelling without ticket. Petitioner was served with a charge-sheet, show cause notice, and eventually...
The Allahabad High Court has upheld the dismissal of a bus conductor for carrying 59 passengers without ticket, stating that it is a serious misconduct.
Petitioner was a conductor of the bus plying from Faizabad to Akbarpur. Upon inspection, it was found that 59 passengers on the bus were travelling without ticket. Petitioner was served with a charge-sheet, show cause notice, and eventually was terminated from service.
The Regional Manager, Faizabad remanded the matter back to the authority for fresh consideration and set aside the termination order. After due disciplinary proceedings with opportunity to the petitioner to reply, his termination order was passed. Appeal was filed before the Regional Manager which was also dismissed. Accordingly, petitioner approached the High Court.
The Court relied on MD, North-East Karnataka Road Transport Corpn. v. K. Murti, wherein the Supreme Court held that carrying passengers without ticket or with discounted tickets would amount to dishonesty or gross negligence and such conductor could not be retained in service has he caused financial loss to the corporation.
The Court observed that the bus was inspected 12kms from the starting point and the conductor had sufficient time to distribute tickets to the passengers.
Noting that due procedure was followed in the disciplinary proceedings, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery held,
“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..”
Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
Case Title: Jagdamba Prasad Pandey vs. State of U.P. and Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 246
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 246