DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER Vs. M.C. GANGAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, though listed for orders, with the consent of learned Counsel for parties, finally heard and disposed of by this order. Petitioner-public road transport corporation, aggrieved by the award dated 18-4-2013 allowing I.D. No. 207 of 2010 of the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, Annexure-F, has presented this petition.

(2.) Facts leading to the order dated 30-6-2007 passed by the petitioner imposing the punishment of withholding respondent-driver's one annual increment with cumulative effect and deduction of one month's salary in ten monthly installments was pursuant to a domestic enquiry extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respondent, on the allegation that on 30-7-2005, at about 2.45 p.m. the respondent while driving a Volvo Bus belonging to the petitioner-Corporation, in a rash and negligent manner on Bangalore to Mysore Road, caused an accident, in front of Mudugere Government Hospital, Channapatna Taluk, by dashing the hind side of the lorry, whence the Enquiry Officer returned a finding that the charge was proved, and the Disciplinary Authority on an independent assessment of facts, circumstances and evidence on record, concurred with the findings and imposed the punishment.

(3.) That order, when subject-matter of conciliation proceeding led to a failure report followed by the State Government in its letter dated 20-10-2010 referring for adjudication the industrial dispute over the order of punishment to the Industrial Tribunal at Bangalore, registered as I.D. No. 207 of 2010. Before the Industrial Tribunal, parties having filed their respective pleadings, the premise on which a preliminary issue when framed a finding was recorded holding that the domestic enquiry was fair and proper. There afterwards, the Industrial Tribunal examined whether the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority were perverse and accordingly observed that in Ex. M. 4 the logbook of the bus there was an entry that the right side brake was weak and regard being had to the opinion of the officers of the petitioner in Ex. M. 6 that the lorry proceeding ahead of the bus had applied brake suddenly without indication and driver of the bus had not maintained safe distance, the accident occurred coupled with the fact that the witness for the petitioner admitted that the lorry driver was prosecuted by the police, jumped to the conclusion that the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer in the domestic enquiry was perverse and by the award impugned, set aside the order of punishment and entitled the respondent to consequential monetary benefits.