Conviction on criminal charge does not trigger automatic removal under Rule 19 CCS(CCA) Rules; must record reasons to dispense with inquiry, consider offence nature, service impact, and afford representation opportunity.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Petitioner herein is aggrieved of order dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure P-13), whereby Review Petition having been filed by him against the order dated 22.8.2020, laying therein challenge to order dated 22.8.2020, passed by the Managing Director, Himachal Road Transport Corporation, thereby upholding order of removal of the petitioner from service vide letter dated 23.12.2019 (Annexure P-9), came to be dismissed.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that petitioner herein, who is working as Driver in Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Hamirpur, was deployed with bus bearing registration No. HP67-1811, enroute Hamirpur-Amritsar on 22.3.2011. Unfortunately afore said bus met with an accident at Jalandhar-Pathankot bye-pass, as a result thereof, FIR no. 45 of 2011 dated 23.3.2011, was registered against the petitioner at Police- Station Jalandhar under Section 279 and 304 A of the Indian Penal Code. Police after completion of the investigation presented challan in the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalandhar, which on the basis of pleadings adduced on record by the prosecution held the petitioner accused guilty of his having committed offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304 A of IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment of three months under of the and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and pay fine of 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days under Section 304-A of . Though petitioner preferred appeal bearing No. 22 of 2016 before Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.1.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, but same was dismissed vide judgment dated 2.11.2016. After dismissal of the appeal, petitioner was taken into custody and he remained in Jail w.e.f. 2.11.2016 to 8.2.2017 i.e. period of three months and fourteen days.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, accused preferred Criminal Revision No. 4313 of 2016 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, whereby sentence imposed by the land trial court came to be reduced to the extent of period already undergone by the petitioner, however, fact remains that judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by the court below under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC was not interfered with, as a result thereof, petitioner stood convicted.

4. Since petitioner failed to disclose factum with regard to his being imprisoned w.e.f. 2.11.2016 to 8.2.2017. Respondent- Corporation vide memorandum dated 13.12.2019 (Annexure P-7), served Show Cause Notice upon him to explain that why he be not removed from the service in pursuance to provision contained in Rule 19 of the CCS (CCS) Rules 1965 ( in short “Rules”). Though petitioner filed detailed reply to the afore Show Cause Notice (Annexure P-8), but fact remains that vide order dated 23.12.2019 passed by the Divisional Manager, Himachal Road Transport Corporation Hamirpur, petitioner came to be removed from service in terms of Rule 19 of the Rules. In the afore background, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set-aside aforesaid order.

5. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Sunil Mohal Goel, learned Senior counsel duly assisted by Mr. Vipul Sharda, Advo