V.S. Dave, J. - (1.)This writ petition is directed against an order of removal from service of the petitioner, Khem Chand, by the Regional Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport, Corporation (hereinafter mentioned as "RSRTC5"), dated Dec. 3, 1974.
(2.)Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner was a conductor in the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation in the month of June, 1974, and was working at Banner. On Aug. 31, 1974 the petitioner was deployed in bus No. 1969 and his duty was to issue tickets to the passengers travelling in the bus. This bus was checked at Numbasar by Assistant Transport inspector, Shri Jorawar Singh, who was accompanied with Traffic Inspector, Mool Singh Deval, and they found that there were 13 passengers who we re travelling without tickets and 180 kg. of luggage was also found for which no charges were collected from the concerned passenger, it is alleged that Jorawar Singh and Mool Singh prepared a memo and thereafter they reported the matter to the higher authorities as a consequence of which the Regional Manager issued a charge-sheet Ex.P.l to the petitioner on Sept. 6, 1974. In this charge-sheet it had been mentioned that 13 passengers at the time of inspection were found travelling without tickets and so also 180 kg. of luggage was also found in the bus without realising charges The break-up of the passengers was given in this charge-sheet as to from which point to which point passengers were travelling, it was further mentioned that out of those 13 passengers the petitioner had not at all charged the fare while from the 7 and also for the luggage. Regarding other six they had been charged but he did not issue the tickets to them. According to the charge-sheet the RSRTC had been put to a pecuniary loss of rupees 42.95P. A detailed reply was tiled to the charge-sheet by the petitioner on Sept. 16, 1974 where he contested the charges and gave his explanation. His case was that he could not issue the tickets to some of the passengers because there were four constables with a couple of children who were not prepared to purchase the tickets and there were alterations and most of the time consumed in it, as a result of which he could not issue the tickets, He raised some more pleas in his reply but they are not relevant, for the disposal of this writ petition. During the course of enquiry Jorwar Singh was examined and way-bill and has checking report were placed on record. The petitioner cross examined Jorwar Singh and also examined himself in his defence. The enquiry officer submitted his report holding the petitioner guilty of misconduct under Standing Order No. 341 of RSRTC Employees and Workshop Employees Standing Order On the basis of this the removal order of the petitioner from the service was issued on Feb. 27, 1980 presumably under some agreement entered into between the Employees Labour Union and the Management. Aggrieved by it this writ petition has been preferred.
(3.)This writ petition came up before Honourable Mr. Justice M. C. Jain on Nov. 5, 1980 for admission on which date he issued a show cause notice. The notices were issued immediately thereafter but it is regrettable that the same were not returned to this court for over 1, 12 years and the office awaited the receipt Of the notices which were presented time and again, it appears from the record that the enquiry officer Shri K. C. Sogani received the notices long back and he sent the served copy of the notice to the Addl. Registrar but none cared to appear before this Court. The parties were deemed to have been served for the purpose of admission by the order, dated July 19, 1983 and the case was listed for admission after the she cause notice as mentioned on July 26, 1983. On this date after hearing the counsel for the petitioner this writ petition was admitted and fresh notices were issued which were made returnable within 10 weeks. The notices were sent by a registered post by the learned counsel for the petitioner and they were received by the respondents in time as acknowledge me at due receipt were placed on record. The service was found to be complete on Oct. 4, 1983 and since thereafter practically more than 11 months have elapsed but none appeared on behalf of the respondent, as such this writ petition is being disposed of ex parte.