- (1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issue a writ or der or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the award dated 16-6-1995 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Uttar Pradesh, Dehradun, whereby it has been held that the re moval from service of workman Mansa Ram Nainwal driver from 31-3-1993 by the employers was not illegal and im proper and that the workman is not entitled to any relief.
(2.) RELEVANT facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the peti tioner was appointed as Driver in the U. P State Road Transport Corporation (for short the Corporation) on 1-11-1988 and during the relevant period, he was driver on Bus No. UGA-9338. On the fateful day, i. e. 10-10-1990 the petitioner was on duty and he took the Bus in question on Dehradun-Mussoorie road. When the bus reached near village Bhatta, another bus of Corporation, namely bus No. UGA-9479 was coming down the hill from opposite direction towards Dehradun at a high speed and bus of the petitioner was climbing the hill road towards Mussoorie. As soon as the said bus UGA-9338 reached near Magic Pan Restaurant, then in order to save the bus coming downwards, the driver lost control over the bus and it rolled down in a gorge about 500 Mt. deep with the result, as many as 12 passen gers including the conductor Arjun Singh lost their lives in the said accident and 25 passengers suffered grievous injuries. The petitioner also sustained injuries in the said accident. The petitioner workman was placed under suspension under the or ders of the Assistant Regional Manager (Hill) Dehradun dated 16-10-1990 and departmental disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the driver and he was charge sheeted vide letter dated 25-' 1-1991. The charges levelled against the driver included that of rash and negli gent driving of the bus in question. A re ply was filed by the petitioner on 15-2-1991 and a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner. The pe titioner was given opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of the Corpora tion and to lead his defence. The depart mental inquiry was conducted by Sri H. S. Saxena, I. F. S. (Retired ). In the in quiry report, charges were not found proved. The punishing authority did not agree with the enquiry report and issued a show cause notice against the peti tioner dated 18-12-1991. In that show cause notice, the Regional Manager/pun ishing Authority has concluded that there was no defect in the bus prior to the accident and the accident in ques tion took place due to rash and negli gent driving of the bus by the petitioner resulting to death of 12 persons and heavy financial loss was caused to the Corporation. By the show cause-notice, the petitioner was required to submit his reply within 15 days as to why he be not removed from the service. The petitioner filed his reply to the said show cause notice, which is Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition. In his reply, the petitioner had submitted that there was no evidence on the point of rash and negligent driv ing and the attribution of this charge is result of personal opinion of the punish ing authority. In the last it was con tended that the punishment proposed is major penalty and harsh and severe in nature. The punishing authority/regional Manager ultimately re-assessed the en quiry report and ultimately passed the order of removal from service of the driver Mansa Ram Nainwal as men tioned in the order dated 31-3-1993.
(3.) IT may also be noted that a mag isterial inquiry was ordered by the Dis trict Magistrate Dehradun to be con ducted by S. D. M. Mussoorie regarding the motor accident in question, which took place on 10- 10-1990. Sub Divi sional Magistrate, Mussoorie conducted the said magisterial inquiry and submit ted his enquiry report dated 31-12-1990. Aggrieved, the workman-peti tioner preferred departmental appeal before the Regional Chief Manager (West) U. RS. R. T. C. Meerut, who did not find favour with the appellant-petitioner holding that there is no force in the appeal and ultimately dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner-work man raised an industrial dispute under Section 4-K of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. The dispute was ultimately referred to the Presiding Officer Labour Court for adjudication of the question whether the removal from service of the workman Mansa Ram Nainwal by the employers from 31-3-1993 is unjustified or illegal ? If so to which benefit the ap plicant:/ workman is entitled and to what extent.;