Point of Law: Rule 19 of CCS CCA Rules reads as penalty imposed on a Government servant on ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

Petitioner had approached erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal against his removal from service vide Office Order dated 8.9.2015 passed by Regional Manager, HRTC Baijnath by filing Original Application No. 5262 of 2015, which was admitted by the erstwhile Administrative Tribunal on 22.6.2017. After abolition of said Tribunal, Original Application was transferred to this Court and registered as CWPOA No. 6429 of 2019 i.e. present petition.

2. Undisputed facts in present case are that petitioner was appointed as a Driver in Baijnath Unit of Himachal Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘HRTC’) on regular basis on 4.3.2000. On 21.6.2008 he was driving bus No. HP 53 A-7503, enrouted from Amritsar to Baijnath and when bus was entering the bus stand of Pathankot, it collided with Motor Cycle, causing death of Motor Cycle rider, leading to registration of FIR No. 65 dated 21.6.2008 under Sections 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, in furtherance whereof petitioner was subjected to trial and was convicted vide judgment dated 3.5.2012 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pathankot and, thereafter, Appeal, Revision and Special Leave Petition preferred by him before Sessions Judge Gurdaspur Punjab, High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Supreme Court, respectively, were dismissed and ultimately he had to undergo imprisonment for a period of 9 months 20 days w.e.f. 8.8.2014 to 28.5.2015 and before serving the aforesaid sentence he served HRTC till 8.8.2014 and after serving the sentence he approached the authorities for submitting his joining report alongwith copies of judgments passed in Criminal Case, whereupon he was served a notice dated 9.6.2015 for showing cause that why he should not be removed from the service invoking provisions of Rule 19 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and after filing response, he was removed from the service vide Office Order dated 8.9.2015.

3. It is undisputed that after the accident, Works Manager, HRTC Pathankot had inquired the matter and recorded the statement of petitioner (driver) and conductor deputed with him and had submitted his inquiry report to Regional Manager HRTC Baijnath alongwith rough sketch of accident scene, concluding therein that Motor Cyclist was overtaking the bus from the left side i.e. opposite to the driver side and had succeeded partly, but was crushed under the front right tyre, with his opinion that petitioner was not at fault as he could not see Motorcycle overtaking from left (wrong) side as because of low height of Motor Cycle, it was not in the visibility area of the bus driver.

4. It is also admitted that the Motor Cyclist was serving in Indian Air Force and was resident of Visakhapatnam and his dependants had filed petition before MACT Visakhapatnam as MOP No. 307 of 2009, titled as Smt. N. Aruna Kumari and others Vs. Mohinder Singh and another.

5. Counter filed by the HRTC in Motor Accident Claim petition, placed on record alongwith MA No. 1000 of 2019, also remained undisputed, wherein Regional Manager HRTC Baijnath had responded as under:-

“2. It is submitted that the bus bearing No. HP 53A 7503 belonging to this respondent, driven by first respondent never hit the motor cycle driven by Sri Nagulapati Kishore Kumar on 22-06-2008 as alleged in the petition. As such this respondent or the first respondent are not liable to pay any compensation jointly and severally, much less and compensation claimed in the present application to the petitioners.

2 to 4. … …. …

5. It is submitted that the first respondent was deployed as driver of bus No. HP 53A 7503 which was plied on Amritsar-Baijnath bus route. Sri Ramesh Chand was performing the duty of conductor in the said bus. It is submitted that at about 4 P.M. on 21-06-2008 when the first respondent was driving the bus towards Patankot bus terminal, the deceased was coming on the motor cycle in the opposite direction and the said motor cycle at that time is on the side of the bus wh