LAWS(TLNG)-2024-2-96

T. RAMULU Vs. TSRTC

Decided On February 26, 2024
T. Ramulu Appellant
V/S
Tsrtc Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has questioned the order of removal dtd. 9/11/2009 passed by the disciplinary authority as well as the order dtd. 15/2/2010 passed by the revisional authority directing to reinstate him as a fresh Driver.

(2.) Heard both sides and perused the record.

(3.) Petitioner was appointed as a Driver in the respondents-Corporation in the year 1996 on regular basis. A charge sheet was issued to him on 22/6/2009 to the effect that on 8/5/2009 at about 07.30 p.m. he caused an accident while driving the Corporation bus bearing No.AP-28Z-1781, causing severe injuries to a pedestrian, which resulted in his death. Petitioner has submitted his explanation to the said charge and having not satisfied with the same, an inquiry was ordered into the incident. The statement of the petitioner was recorded in the inquiry proceedings and after recording the statements of the service conductor and also the Assistant Manager who conducted the preliminary inquiry, the Inquiry Officer has submitted his report holding the petitioner to be responsible for the accident. Basing on the said inquiry report, the disciplinary authority has passed an order dtd. 9/11/2009 removing the petitioner from service. The appeal filed by him was also dismissed, whereupon, he has filed a revision and the revisional authority, by order dtd. 15/2/2010, while holding that the order of removal as well as rejection of appeal passed by the earlier authorities were proper and justified, has taken a lenient view on humanitarian grounds, set aside the orders of removal and directed for reinstatement of petitioner as a fresh Driver on certain terms and conditions. Case of the petitioner is that the accident was the result of the pedestrian suddenly coming on to the road to stop the bus without knowing that it is an Express Service and in the process, the pedestrian dashed in the middle of the bus and that there was no negligence on his part and inspite of the same, he was made responsible. Hence, he prayed to set aside the order of removal as well as the order of revisional authority to appoint him as a fresh Driver.