CWP No.18423 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.18423 of 2008 Date of decision: 23.10.2008 Amarjeet Singh ...Petitioner Versus The Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. APS Shergill, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner in this case has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order, Annexure P-3 dated 16th November, 2006, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service after he was convicted in a case under Section 304-A IPC. The petitioner has averred in the writ petition that he was appointed as a driver in the office of respondent no.1 on 24th November, 1988. On December 02, 1994, while the petitioner was driving truck bearing No. PB-12-2200 belonging to the respondent corporation, an accident occurred in which a cyclist was killed. A case under Section 304-A, 279 IPC was registered against the petitioner. On 15th January, 2000, the petitioner was convicted by the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patiala was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six CWP No.18423 of 2008 2 months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. For 15 days under Section 304-A IPC and to undergo R.I. for three months under Section 279 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Patiala, which was dismissed on 12.9.2000. The revision filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by this Court on May 02, 2005. His conviction and sentence under Sections 304-A and 279 IPC was upheld. Thereafter, the petitioner also underwent the sentence awarded to him. On 16th November, 2006, the order of dismissal was passed by the disciplinary authority. The petitioner has assailed the order of dismissal before this Court. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel has argued that the order, Annexure P-3 has been passed solely on the basis of his conviction under Section 304-A IPC. However, the said offence did not involve any element of moral turpitude and therefore, he has been wrongly dismissed from service. We have considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner. It is clear that the petitioner was convicted for driving a vehicle belonging to the respondent corporation in a rash and negligent manner and thereby causing the death of a cyclist. His appeal and revision were also dismissed and he underwent the sentence awarded by the court. Thus, the Managing Director of the respondent corporation dismissed the petitioner from service under Rules 5 & 13 of the Punjab CWP No.18423 of 2008 3 Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970 with effect from 31.10.2006. The Managing Director also took into account the instructions issued by the Punjab Government vide No.3/23/98-1 PP- II/0304, dated 05.08.1998 which say that convict employee is not fit to be retained in the service of the respondent corporation. The counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any legal infirmity with the impugned order. We are thus of the considered view that the impugned order dated 16.11.2006 (Annexure P-3) calls for no interference in writ jurisdiction. The argument that the petitioner could not have been dismissed from service as his conviction under Section 304-A and 279 IPC did not involve any moral turpitude, is devoid of any force. We thus find no merit in the petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE October 23, 2008 'rajpal'