Gopal Krishan Vyas, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is one of the glaring example of disobedience of the orders passed by this Court. The petitioner is repeatedly knocking the doors of this Court for redressal of his grievance. In this writ petition, petitioner is. challenging the impugned order of termination dated 1.12.1983 (Annexure 3), order dated 22.2.1984 (Annexure 5) and the order dated 28.6.2006 (Annexure 19) and prayed that the respondent Corporation may be directed to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Driver with all consequential benefits along with full back wages.
(2.) ACCORDING to the facts of the case, initially the petitioner was appointed under the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation on the post of driver in the year 1978 after due selection and continued on the said post till 1.12.1983. The respondent No. 3 issued a charge -sheet on 7.12.1982 against the petitioner alleging therein the charge with regard to accident due to rash and negligent driving and causing loss of Rs. 8000/ - to the respondent Corporation. A reply to the charge -sheet was filed by the petitioner in which the petitioner denied all the charges levelled against him and it was specifically submitted that due to accident he remained in police custody from 9.10.1982 to 14.10.1982 and thus he could not remain present near the bus when Sh. Sheodeva Ram, mechanic came on the spot for repair of the said bus. It is further submitted by him that on 14.10.1982, he handed over the bus to Shri Sheodeva Ram. It was further stated by the petitioner in his reply that as per the report of M.T.O., Bikaner, due to accident, loss caused to the Corporation was to the tune of Rs. 500/ - only and Rs. 8000/ - as mentioned in the charge -sheet is wrong. In reply, it is specifically stated further by the petitioner that accident was caused due to damage of compressor vacuum pipe because it resulted in major defects in breaks and the petitioner tried his levels best to avoid the accident. After filing reply, one Shri G.C. Saxena was appointed as enquiry officer and enquiry was held at Jaipur. As per the petitioner in that enquiry, no witnesses were examined neither the petitioner was given any opportunity to cross -examine or to produce his defence witnesses and thereafter on the basis of, such enquiry, the disciplinary authority terminated the services of the petitioner vide order dated 1.12.1983. In the termination order, no reasons and findings were given with regard to allegations against the petitioner for charge of accident and damages caused to the Coloration. Against the said order of termination, as per standing orders, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner and all the grounds were raised with regard to not providing opportunity of hearing and reasons for accident. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 22.2.1984 by the respondent No. 2 in very casual manner by a non -speaking order without application of mind.
(3.) AGAINST both the orders passed by disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority, a writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 305/1984 was preferred by the petitioner before this Court. The said writ petition was partly allowed vide order dated 10.7.1986 whereby the order of appellate authority dated 22.4.1984 was set aside and case was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh decision;