1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 772 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 772 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner M.S.R.T.C. A cyclist coming from wrong side gave dash to the rear portion of the bus and for that accident after departmental inquiry two increments of Respondent were withheld. He approached Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) No.135 of 2001 invoking Item 9 and Item 10 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. Industrial Court has allowed the complaint. 2. Shri Deshmukh for Petitioner contends that being driver of a public transport bus, respondent was expected to take more precaution and the accident occurred on account of his negligence. He further points out in M.A.C.T. proceedings petitioner has been ordered to pay a compensation of Rs. 65,000/- to the victim. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 772 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. The proceedings before M.A.C.T. and evidence adduced before M.A.C.T. is not relevant as material in departmental inquiry is to be looked into here. The Industrial Court has found that cyclist came from wrong side and gave dash to rear part of the M.S.R.T.C. vehicle. In this situation, how Respondent/ driver could have avoided the dash is not clear. The alleged fault on his part to take reasonable precaution is also not being substantiated by pointing out steps expected to be adopted by him in this situation. 4. Reliance has been placed upon judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of "Pune Municipal Transport V/s Babulal A. Dhotre and another" reported in 2008 (2) Bom.LC. 578 (Bom). There a pedestrian was injured by a bus which was being taken in reverse. The facts, therefore, clearly show that the driver can be said to be responsible 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 772 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. for such accident. Here there is no material on record to implicate him. 5. I do not find any jurisdiction error or perversity. Petition is rejected. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:23/02/2011. ans/772