- (1.) Challenge has been laid in the present writ petition to an order dated 6th of March, 1997 passed by respondent No. 3, removing the petitioner from services as also the appellate order dated 6.4.1998, affirming it.
(2.) Petitioner claims to have been appointed as a Driver in the respondents-Corporation in 1989. He was assigned duty to drive the bus of the respondents-Corporation from Delhi to Budaun. On the relevant date i.e. 28th of March, 1992 while discharging his duties, petitioner was going to Budaun from Delhi by Bus No. U.G.L.609, when he met with an accident at about 8.30 p.m. near Uddyani By-pass. The bus hit a bullock-cart going on the left road side from behind, which resulted in injury being caused to the Conductor of the bus, who subsequently died. Petitioner also sustained minor injuries. A first information report was lodged by the Junior Centre In-charge of the Budaun Depot. of respondents-Corporation, in which a charge sheet was submitted on 28th of March, 1992. The first information report apart from narrating the incident also mentioned that accidental examination was performed by the doctors and that he was not hospitalized, yet no first information report was lodged by the driver. A trial proceeded pursuant to the charge sheet, in which all the three prosecution witnesses turned hostile. In such circumstances, petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case instituted under sections 279, 337, 338, 427 and 304-A IPC in case crime No. 128 of 1992.
(3.) In respect of the aforesaid incident, departmental proceedings were also initiated against the petitioner with issuance of a charge sheet to the petitioner. After narrating the incident, it was alleged that petitioner had not lodged any first information report, although he had sustained minor injuries and in case, the lights of the bus were not working, then petitioner ought to have got the defects rectified before proceedings further. Charge of negligent driving amounting to misconduct was levelled against the petitioner. Petitioner submitted his reply, in which it was stated that the lights of the bus were in order and it was only when the bus was cornered on the left side to give pass to speeding truck that it landed in a pit and suddenly the lights went off and despite petitioner's attempt he could not stop the vehicle resulting in the accident. Oral and documentary evidence were adduced in the matter. The enquiry officer returned a finding that petitioner's defence was not liable to be accepted as it was admitted by the petitioner that lights of the bus were in working order and his defence that he was trying to save the passengers by taking the vehicle on the left side, as a result of which, the bus landed in a pit and the lights suddenly went off, was not found credible enough to be accepted. The charges as levelled in the enquiry proceedings was found proved. A show cause notice was thereafter issued to the petitioner and on the basis of consideration of petitioner's reply, an order of removal from service was passed against the petitioner on 6th of March, 1997, which has been affirmed in appeal.;