AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Deepak Gupta, J.—The petitioner was deployed as a Conductor Driver with bus No. HP-37-6805 on 18.6.2002. In MACT proceedings he was held to be jointly and severally liable alongwith HRTC to pay compensation to the claimant. The HRTC has initiated the proceedings to recover the amount from the petitioner which he challenged in these proceedings. He was acquitted by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate vide judgment dated 21.5.2004. It is represented by the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the parties that the judgment dated 21.5.2004 had attained finality.
Mr. B.S. Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record a copy of letter dated 8th November, 2007 issued by the Managing Director of the respondent Corporation. The text of the letter reads thus:
"Subject: Recoveries of amount awarded by MACT in bus accidents.
Memo,
A large number of references are received from the Unit Officers regarding recovery of the amount awarded by MACT in accident cases. Though in the past, numerous instructions have been issued by this office conveying therein that the amount of the MACT award is required to be recovered from the driver concerned. But, references are made on the grounds that in case particular driver is acquitted by the Criminal Court in that event whether the recovery of awarded amount is to be effected or not.
This matter was discussed in the meeting with the Joint Action Committee held on 17.8.2007 and it was decided vide item No. 13 that in case driver is acquitted in criminal case, no recovery of awarded amount by the Ld. M.A.C.T. shall be made from such Drivers. Copy of Proceeding of the Joint Action Committee meeting held on 17.8.2007 stands already supplied to the Unit Officers on 11.9.2007. You are, therefore, informed not to effect any recovery of awarded amount, in case he is acquitted in the criminal case."
In the present case also, the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned trial Court on 21.5.2004. No doubt the petitioner is a conductor and not a driver but the same principle shall apply. Accordingly, in view of the decision arrived at vide letter dated 08.11.2007, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure A-3, dated 5.8.2004 is quashed and set-aside. No costs.