IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No.6430/2008 Decided on:30.7.2010 _____________________________________________ Biku Ram. …Petitioner. Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Nemo. For the Respondents: Mr. Adarsh Sharma. Advocate. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner has assailed the action of respondents, whereby the recoveries are being effected from the salary of the petitioner. The F.I.R. was also registered after the bus which the petitioner was driving met with an accident. The challan was put in the competent Court of law. However, fact of the matter is that the respondents have not placed on record the copy of judgment passed by the learned trial Court till date. The respondent- Corporation has taken a policy decision vide notification dated 3rd February, 2003 not to effect recoveries from the employees who have been absolved by the Criminal Court. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 2. Consequently, the petition is disposed of with a direction of the respondent-Corporation to decide the case of the petitioner in view of the notification dated 3rd February, 2003 in case he has been absolved by the Criminal Court. However, in case he has been convicted, the law will take its own course. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 30.7.2010 *awasthi*