Back
2023 Supreme(Telangana) 638
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Surepalli Nanda, J.
Mogulla Ashok Goud - Petitioner
Versus
The TSRTC and others - Respondents
W.P. No. 24429 of 2022
Decided On : 11-09-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr D.V.Chalapathi Rao, Standing Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. G.Srinivas
The court emphasized the importance of fair and unbiased proceedings and the need to consider the petitioner's explanation before making a decision.
Headnote:
Insurance Policy - Termination of Hire Bus Agreement - Clause 9(i) of the Agreement - [Clause 9(i) of the Agreement] - The court discussed the violation of Clause 9(i) of the Agreement, which specifies that non-coverage of vehicle insurance entails termination of the agreement without notice. The petitioner's renewal of the insurance policy and the alleged fabrication of insurance policy documents were key legal provisions influencing the court's decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner operated a passenger bus under a hire agreement with the respondent corporation. The corporation terminated the agreement alleging submission of fake insurance policy documents by the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the termination of the agreement was biased, predetermined, and unfair as the respondent proceeded against the petitioner without considering the petitioner's explanation and relied on a report from the third respondent.
Issues: Violation of agreement clause, biased termination, alleged fabrication of insurance policy documents
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the termination was unfair and set aside the order based on the biased and predetermined manner in which the respondent proceeded against the petitioner.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the order of termination was set aside with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one like Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders of the 2nd respondent terminating the hire bus agreement of the petitioner for his passenger bus bearing No. TS 26 T 6670 vide orders No. T1/359(23)/2019- RM-WL dated 26.04.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, against principles of natural justice and fair play and in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same.
3. The case of the Petitioner, in brief, is as follows:
a) The Petitioner, in pursuance of the tender issued by the 1st respondent for the supply of passenger buses on a hire basis, submitted his tender and was declared as a successful bidder. Upon the instructions of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 the petitioner started operating passenger bus bearing No. TS 26 T 6670 on the route Thorrur - Hyderabad via Jaffargad upon an agreement executed with respondent no. 2 for a term of 10 years, starting from 12.03.2020 to 11.03.2024 and renewable thereafter for the rest of the term of the agreement.
b) Subsequently, the petitioner started operating the passenger bus for hire to the respondent corporation and no complaint in whatsoever manner was made against the petitioner in providing the services. While things stood thus, the insurance officials intimated the petitioner that the vehicle’s insurance has expired on 07.02.2022, and the same was renewed by the petitioner, which was effective from 07.02.2022 and valid up to 06.02.2023 and thus, the policy documents were handed over to the 3rd respondent.
c) The 2nd respondent issued a show-cause notice vide No.T1/359(23)/2019-RM-WL dated18.04.2022 alleging that the petitioner has submitted a fake and fabricated insurance policy to the 3rd respondent by tampering the date of validity of the insurance policy which was effective from 02.01.2022 to 01.01.2023 for claiming hire charges, wherein the above said show cause notice was based on alleged report which has been allegedly submitted by respondent no. 3 after receiving the insurance policy from the petitioner for the period starting from 07.02.2022.
d) The allegation made by the respondent no. 2 in his show-cause notice prima facie show that the petitioner has submitted an insurance policy for the period starting from 07.02.2022 to 06.02.2023 again, after an insurance policy for the very same vehicle for the period starting from 02.01.2022 to 01.01.2023 was submitted by petitioner.
e) The petitioner submitted an explanation dated 23.04.2022 to the 2nd Respondent stating that under no circumstances the petitioner submitted any tampered insurance policy and any such situation has never arisen. Alongside, the 3rd respondent did not inform the petitioner about the expiry of the insurance policy.
f) The 2nd respondent without appreciating the representation dated 27.04.2022 submitted by the petitioner, called upon respondent No. 2 to conduct an enquiry into the alleged allegation of submission of a fake insurance policy. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent passed a cryptic and unreasonable order based on the report allegedly submitted by 3rd respondent and thus, terminated the hire agreement entered into with the petitioner. The respondents have stopped operating the petitioner’s passenger bus even before the issuance of a show-cause notice alleging misconduct against him. Hence this writ petition.
4. Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondents, in brief, is as under:
a) The petitioner has entered the agreement for initial four years period from 12.03.2020 to 11.03.2024 and has produced the Insurance Certificate with Policy issued by the New India Assurance Company Ltd in respect of the Hire Bus No. TS26T-6670 (EXPRESS Type) for the period from 27.12.2019 to 26.12.2020, 27.12.2020 to 26.12.2021 and from 07.02.2022 to 06.02.2023.
b) The Petitioner has submitte
