Karnataka High Court dismisses NWKRTC appeal against order asking it to reinstate dismissed driver

Bengaluru: The Dharwad bench of the Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the North Western Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (NWKRTC) challenging the reinstatement order of one of its drivers involved in an accident.

The court observed that the stand of the NWKRTC, defending the driver in the claim proceedings and on the other removing him from service in the disciplinary proceedings, is malafide.

"The Corporation being a government entity and a State under the constitution is required to be a model litigant. A model litigant cannot take two contradictory stands, on the one hand, contending that the driver was driving in a proper manner, virtually certifying the driver's conduct and driving abilities and on the other hand, initiate proceedings against a driver for rash and negligent driving by contending that there is misconduct. The stand that is to be taken by the Corporation has to be uniform,” Justice Suraj Govindaraj said while directing the corporation to comply with the orders of the Labour Court, Hubballi.

Hussainsab, who was a driver with the corporation, was involved in an accident in 2013 in which a motorcyclist had died. The family members of the motorcyclist filed a claim petition and the NWKRTC had defended Hussainsab stating that he was driving the bus properly. The claim petition had reached finality in favour of the claimants.

In the meantime, the NWKRTC initiated disciplinary proceedings against Hussainsab, alleging rash and negligent driving. This proceeding culminated in the dismissal of Hussainsab from services for the alleged misconduct. On September 25, 2019, the Labour court at Hubballi ordered reinstatement of Hussainsab.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that the contradictory stand taken by the corporation is not sustainable and is in fact malafide. “The stand that is to be taken by the Corporation has to be uniform, it is always open to the Corporation to prosecute a driver for rash and negligent driving but at the same time, the Corporation would have to act fairly and in a Motor Vehicle Claim Petition, not contend that there was no fault on part of the driver, but accept that the driver was driving rashly and negligently on account of disciplinary proceeding having already been initiated against the driver,” the court said.