JYOTI NATH GANGULY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule was issued at the instance of Jyoti Nath Ganguly, for a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or Certiorari and/or such other appropriate writ or writs as this Court might think fit.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was an employee of the Commercial Carrying Company Limited for a span of about 20 years, and when that Company was relieved and the State Government took up the Transport Service in the Gauhati -Shillong route to the exclusion of others, the Government started a department of its own, known as the State Transport Department, and the petitioner was absorbed as one of the Drivers in that route sometime in 1948, and he was regularly discharging his duties since then till 20 -1 -1952. On 20 -1 -1952, when the vehicle, of which the petitioner was the driver, was taken to the Gauhati Station yard, the Petrol Khalashi, contrary to the instruction of the petitioner, was pouring petrol into the tank inside the vehicle, and it all of a sudden caught fire due to some match stick being inadvertently thrown by some one of the passengers who had already boarded the bus, but the petitioner was held responsible for the negligent act, as a result of which the accident, as aforesaid, took place and few passengers were severely burnt and one of them subsequently died in the hospital. The State Transport Authority at once took action and the Station Superintendent of Gauhati, by his order No. ST/GHY/42/2962, dated 20 -1 -1952, suspended the petitioner and called upon him to explain as to why he should not be removed from State Transport service on the ground of negligence in the discharge of his duties. The notice (Annexure A to the petition) served on the petitioner is of material importance and it runs thus:

(3.) THE Rule was obtained from this Court on 28 -6 -1954 on the representation that the order of removal from service was illegal, mainly on two grounds - - (i) that the order was in violation of Clause (2) of Article 311 of the Constitution, and (ii) that there was no substantial compliance with Rule 4 of the Disciplinary Rules for State Transport published in the Assam Gazette on 26 -4 -1950. There was a further contention that the notice of suspension was not proper since it came from the Station Superintendent of Gauhati, and not from the Secretary to the State Transport Department, who was the appointing authority.