JUDGMENT : A.S. Supehia, J. 1. Since by the order of the even date, the writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 18841 of 2007 challenging the very same award filed by the respondent-workman has been dismissed for non prosecution as despite the best efforts made by the concerned advocate, the workman has chosen not to appear before this Court. A statement of the learned advocate Mr. Yogen Pandya, who was appearing at the relevant time, was also recorded by this Court. 2. Under the circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to decide the writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 1105 of 2008 filed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service (AMTS) challenging the very same award in absence of any representation of the respondent-workman. 3. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the award dated 16.03.2007 passed by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Complaint (I.T.) No. 239 of 2001 in Reference (IT) No. 433 of 1992. 4. Learned advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent was engaged as a daily wager conductor and he was assigned work as and when the same was available. He has submitted that the respondent-workman was facing grievance of serious charge in preparing bogus tickets of the AMTS and selling the same as genuine. It is submitted that the criminal proceedings were also initiated against the respondent, however, since both the criminal and departmental proceedings were pending, no final order has been passed and hence, the award passed by the Labour Court directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent-workman on his original post was uncalled for. It is submitted that when the respondent was facing the criminal prosecution and also departmental proceedings, which are pending, the Tribunal ought not to have passed the award directing the petitioner to reinstate him in service. 4.1. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has also ordered to pay subsistence allowance from 02.05.2000 to 10.04.2002, which is also illegal since the departmental proceedings are still pending. 5. The facts, as narrated hereinabove, are not disputed. It appears that, on receipt of a secret information, on 02.05.2000 a watch was led and during the trap one Imtiaz @ Bhurio was caught with 3947 bogus tickets of Rs. 4.00 each of AMTS worth Rs. 5. The facts, as narrated hereinabove, are not disputed. It appears that, on receipt of a secret information, on 02.05.2000 a watch was led and during the trap one Imtiaz @ Bhurio was caught with 3947 bogus tickets of Rs. 4.00 each of AMTS worth Rs. 15,988/- were recovered and during the investigation, it was revealed that the other employees of the AMTS were also involved and the connivance of the present respondent was also found in preparing bogus tickets and selling the same and hence, the criminal complaint being I-C.R. No. 60 of 2000 came to be registered against 10 persons for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 470, 471, 409, 114, 201, 467 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, wherein the present respondent is arraigned as an accused no. 5. Thereafter, the investigation was completed and charge-sheet no. 91/2021 also came to be filed, which was registered as a Criminal Case No. 542 of 2000. The respondent was arrested and released on bail. The petitioner initiated departmental proceedings and issued a charge-sheet being DRCP No. 2000/2001 dated 23.05.2001 to the respondent and he was suspended with effect from 02.05.2000. Since the respondent did not cooperate in the departmental inquiry proceedings, the inquiry was concluded ex parte and the charge-sheet was issued, however, before final order of punishment could be passed, the respondent filed a complaint before the Tribunal and obtained interim injunction on 31.07.2001 and by the order dated 29.09.2001, the Tribunal ordered that pending hearing and final disposal of the criminal complaint, the department can proceed with the departmental proceedings, but shall not pass any final order without taking into consideration the orders that may be passed in criminal proceedings. Thereafter, the Tribunal vide award dated 16.03.2007 ordered reinstatement of the respondent-workman on the original post and also directed to pay subsistence allowance for the period from 02.05.2000 to 10.04.2002. 6. The facts, as narrated hereinabove, would suggest that the respondent was embroiled in a criminal case and thereafter, a departmental proceedings was also initiated against him, however, by the impugned award, the Tribunal has directed the reinstatement. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that the respondent was facing serious charge involving in preparing bogus tickets of AMTS and selling the same as genuine and he did not participate in the departmental inquiry. 7. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that the respondent was facing serious charge involving in preparing bogus tickets of AMTS and selling the same as genuine and he did not participate in the departmental inquiry. 7. Under the circumstances, the reinstatement of the respondent was uncalled for and hence, the impugned order dated 16.03.2007 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Complaint (IT) No. 239/2001 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is clarified that, a liberty is reserved in favour of the respondent-workman to file appropriate application for restoring Special Civil Application No. 18847 of 2007 and for reviving the present writ petition also. In case the writ petition filed by the respondent-workman being Special Civil Application No. 18841 of 2007 is restored, the observation made by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 1105 of 2008 may not be construed adverse to the respondent-workman and both the writ petitions may be permitted to be restored and shall be heard a fresh. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.