P F KHAN Vs. DEPOT MANAGER APSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was employed as a driver in the year 1992 in APSRTC. On 25/3/2003, while he was driving a bus, bearing No. AP 11 Z 150, of Anantapur depot, on the route Anantapur-Madanapalli, an accident has taken place, resulting in the death of driver and pillion rider of a motor bike, bearing no. AP 03 H 2878. Alleging that the petitioner drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, and caused the accident, the 1st respondent initiated disciplinary proceedings. A charge sheet, dated 5/5/2003, was issued. The petitioner submitted his explanation. Departmental enquiry was conducted and the 1st respondent passed an order dated 26/7/2003, directing removal of the petitioner, from service. Appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Divisional manager was dismissed on 16/1/2004, and review filed before the Regional manager was rejected on 19/6/2004.

(2.) THE petitioner filed I. D. No. 210 of 2004 in the Labour Court, Anantapur, assailing the order of removal. Through its award, dated 29. 06. 2007, the labour court modified the order of removal of the petitioner, to the one of compulsory retirement. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the award passed by the Labour court and contends that the order of reinstatement passed by the 1st respondent ought to have been set aside.

(3.) SRI S. D. Gowd, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the Labour court did not undertake any discussion worth its name, be it as to the legality or propriety of the order passed by the 1st respondent, or the proof of allegations made against the petitioner. He contends that occurrence of an accident, by itself, must not have resulted in removal of the petitioner from service, particularly when the record of the petitioner was clean, all through. According to the learned counsel, it was obligatory on the part of the Labour court to examine the order of removal in detail and to examine the evidence, which formed part of the record, in the proceedings before the 1st respondent. He contends that the extenuating circumstances were not at all taken into account.