IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.27030 of 1999 Between: A.P.R.T.C., Rep.by its Depot Manger, Dilsukhnagar Depot, Hyderabad District. ...PETITIONER AND Sri M.A. Latef, S/o Late Mohd.Ghouse, R/o H.No.8.2.98, Darulshifa Colony, Opp: Govt Head Quaters Hospitals, Nalgonda District. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling for records in I.D.No.89 of 1994 dt 14.10.98 published in G.O.Rt.No.2284 dt 23.12.1998 on the file of the Hon'ble Labour Court -I, Hyderabad and quash the order. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR APSRTC) Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.27030 of 1999 ORDER: The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (“Corporation” for brevity) is the petitioner herein and this Writ Petition is filed questioning the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-I, Hyderabad, in I.D.No.89 of 1994 dated 14.10.1998, whereby the respondent herein was ordered to be reinstated into service with full back wages and continuity of service. The brief facts are that the respondent was appointed as a driver in the petitioner’s Corporation on 29.01.1981 and when he was driving the bus at 6.35 hours on 12.11.1990, he hit a cyclist on account of which, the cyclist fell on the ground and the bus run over the head of the cyclist causing his instantaneous death. On account of the said death, a Criminal Case was registered and disciplinary proceedings were also initiated. The Enquiry Officer, who probed into the matter, reported that the said accident was solely on account of the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver. On the basis of the said report, the disciplinary authority imposed punishment of removal from service. Against the said order dated 03.01.1993, the respondent- driver preferred an appeal and the same ended in dismissal on 28.08.1993. The same was questioned by raising a dispute and the same was numbered as I.D.No.89 of 1994 before the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad. During the course of the proceedings, though none was examined and no document was marked on behalf of the respondent- driver, the petitioner-Corporation exhibited Exs.M1 to M31. On a careful consideration of the entire material on record, the Labour Court- I, Hyderabad, came to a conclusion that no negligence can be attributed to the driver-respondent herein and accordingly, ordered his reinstatement with continuity of service and payment of full back wages. The same is questioned by the Corporation in this Writ Petition. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation and the learned counsel for the respondent. A case was registered in Crime No.540 of 1990 of Panjagutta Police Station against the respondent-driver for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the same was numbered as C.C.No.172 of 1991 before the V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. However, the evidence let in by the prosecution did not establish the guilt of the respondent. The V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, by his judgment dated 09.04.1992, acquitted the respondent-driver of the said charge. It is true that the finding given by a Criminal Court is not binding insofar as the departmental proceedings are concerned. The Enquiry Officer, after probing into the matter, categorically held that the respondent-driver is guilty of the offence and on the recommendations made by him, the respondent was removed from service. But the fact remains that immediately after the award was passed, the respondent was taken into service on 18.02.1999 and on attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 31.01.2007. Since the petitioner retired from service and the criminal case also ended in acquittal, without going into the merits, this Court inclines to dispose of the Writ Petition confirming the award passed by the Labour Court-I Hyderabad insofar as the reinstatement and continuity of service of the petitioner is concerned. However, regarding the payment of back wages in full is concerned, the same is restricted to one-third {1/3rd} of the total amount. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 11th June 2009 RRB