HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.2552 OF 2003 Dated: 10.03.2011 Between: THE DEPOT MANAGER, APS RTC., BANAGANAPALLI DEPOT. ..... PETITIONER AND KURUVA RAMA SUBBAIAH & ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.2552 OF 2003 ORDER: The writ petition is filed by the A.P.S. R.T.C seeking to call for the records in I.D.No:259 of 2000 on the file of the Labour Court, Ananthapur and to set aside the award dated 19.9.2002. The petitioner is the Management and the 1st respondent is the workman and they will be referred to as arrayed before the tribunal. The facts leading to file the writ petition are that the workman was working as driver in A.P.S R.T.C., Banaganapalli Depot. On the intervening night of 3/4.9.1999, the workman was driving the A.P.S. R.T.C Bus bearing No:AP 10Z 1851 from Hyderabad to Banaganapalli and when it reached Boruvelli village on National High Way, he dashed the bus with a milk van bearing No:AP 9U 3712, as a result of which, the driver of the van and two other occupants of the van died on the spot. The police registered a case against the workman for the offence under section 304-A IPC of K.Turam police station. The Senior Traffic Inspector, Banaganapalli after preliminary enquiry submitted his report to the effect that the workman is prima facie responsible for the accident and consequently, he was issued the charge sheet by framing two charges and by placing him under suspension. The workman submitted his explanation to the effect that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the van. Having not satisfied with the explanation, enquiry was ordered and after conducting the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted his report and the respondents having accepted the enquiry report and after fulfilling all the formalities, passed the order of removal and the said order was confirmed in the appeal as well as in the review. Having aggrieved by the same, the workman filed I.D.259 of 2000 before the Industrial Tribunal-Labour Court, Ananthapur. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on either side before the tribunal. The tribunal framed the following points for consideration: 1.Whether the Departmental enquiry has been vitiated or not? 2.Whether the punishment of removal is justified in the circumstances of the case or not? The tribunal having observed that the punishment awarded to the workman is disproportionate to the proved misconduct and apart from that, the Van Driver was mainly responsible for the accident, set aside the order of removal and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service, but without back wages. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed by the Management. Heard. The learned Standing Counsel for the Management would submit that since the departmental enquiry is not disputed and the charges are proved, the tribunal ought not to have interfered with the order of removal and therefore, the order of the tribunal suffers from illegality and irregularity and the same is liable to be set aside. The Management also filed W.P.M.P.3342 of 2003 seeking for interim suspension of the award and the said W.P.M.P was dismissed. In view of the same, the order of the tribunal was complied with and the workman has been reinstated into service. Before going into the merits of the case, it is to be noted that due to the incident occurred on the intervening night of 3/4.9.1999, the van driver and the two occupants therein died on the spot and in that connection, a case was registered for the offence under section 304-A I.P.C and after a full fledged trial, the criminal case was acquitted against the workman. While considering the claim of the workman, the Labour Court has taken into consideration of the following aspects: 1.The criminal Court passed the judgment acquitting the workman from the criminal charges. 2.During the course of Departmental enquiry, Sri K.Arjunarao, S.T.I., Banaganapalli admitted that the van was being driven in a zig zag manner from the opposite direction and that workman swerved his vehicle towards right side portion to avert the accident and in the meanwhile, the milk van driver again turned his vehicle towards left side of the road resulting in collision of the van and the bus. 3.The Senior Traffic Inspector further admitted that left side of the road is full of ditches and that the bus was plying up gradient road at the time of accident. 4.When he was questioned as to whether it would have resulted in ghastly accident if the petitioner has not moved the bus towards right side, the answer was that the petitioner observing the van plying on wrong side, turned the vehicle towards right side to avert the ghastly accident. The above evidence coupled with the acquittal of the criminal case against the workman makes it clear that at the time of the accident, the van driver was driving the van in a zig zag manner on the wrong side of the road and at that time, the workman had taken all the possible precautions in averting the accident or otherwise, a ghastly accident would have taken place. In this regard, the reasoning given by the Labour Court, is on sound footing in coming to the conclusion that the punishment imposed against the workman is disproportionate and thereby, the labour Court has set aside the same by directing the management to reinstate the workman with continuity of service, but without back wages. In the present facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the acquittal of the criminal case against the workman and the material piece of evidence of the Senior Traffic Inspector, I feel that the reasoning given by the Labour Court, which is on sound footing, does not call for any interference by this Court. Hence, this writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ Justice G. Chandraiah Dated: 10.03.2011 Gurc. HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.2552 of 2003 Dated: 10.03.2011