VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION -324
661
Phipson in his “Law of Evidence” that “nine-tenth of
the world’s business is conducted on the basis of
hearsay” quoted approvingly.
(B) Court jurisdiction
Courts not competent to examine the adequacy or
sufficiency of evidence.
(C) Principles of natural justice — bias
General Manager, supervising the checking of bus
by Inspectors in his official capacity does not amount
to bias, personal or legal, and is competent to
function as disciplinary authority.
(D) Appeal — consideration of
Appellate authority dismissing the appeal after giving
the background of the case and touching the
grievances raised by the delinquent satisfies the
provisions.
Sarup Singh, ex-Conductor vs. State of Punjab,
1989(7) SLR P&H 328
The appellant, conductor in Punjab Roadways, Batala Depot,
was proceeded against in a disciplinary proceedings. On 15-1-84 he
was on duty as Conductor in Bus No. 1762 which left Batala for Dera
Baba Nanak. When the bus had covered about seven kilometres
from Batala, it was checked near Dharamkot. The checking party
comprised Inspector Raj Singh and Banarsi Lal. Out of 60 passengers
travelling in the bus, 42 had not yet been issued tickets nor they had
paid fare to the conductor. Five persons had paid fare and held valid
tickets. The remaining thirteen passengers were such who had paid
fare to the Conductor but had not been issued any ticket. There
were five persons bound for Dera Baba Nanak who had paid fare at
rate of Rs. 2.30 per ticket and equal number were going to village
Shikar who had paid fare to the conductor at the rate of Rs. 1.60 p