Deprecating the conduct of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) in taking false and diametrically opposite stands before the two different legal fora to suit its purpose in an accident case, the High Court of Karnataka directed the Managing Director of the KSRTC to come out with a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to prevent such misconduct by its officers.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj issued the direction while taking a serious note of this misconduct on the part of the KSRTC, which is a public sector undertaking.
The court found that the KSRTC had defended one of its drivers before a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in a road accident occurred in 2015 near Jas toll plaza near Nelamangala in which two persons riding on a motorcycle had died as a result of collision between the KSRTC bus and the two-wheeler.
The KSRTC had categorically contended in writing before the MACT that its driver had driven the bus “slowly and carefully on the left side of the road” and the accident had occurred as the motorcycle rider had rode the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the bus on its front side.
On the contrary, the court found that the KSRTC had initiated a disciplinary inquiry against the driver based on the inspection report of its officer, who had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred due to the “rash and negligent action of the bus driver.”
The KSRTC had dismissed the driver holding him responsible for the accident resulting in the death of two persons. However, a civil court in Tumakuru had directed the KSRTC to reinstate the driver with back wages minus withholding three increments for his negligence.
The contradictory stand taken by the KSRTC was unearthed when the court summoned the records of the disciplinary inquiry and the proceedings before MACT while hearing a petition filed by the KSRTC, which had questioned the civil court’s direction for reinstating the driver. The KSRTC had contended before the civil court that dismissal was a proper punishment for the driver as his negligent driving had resulted in the death of two persons.
“It is only in order to try and escape the payment of compensation that a false stand has been taken by the Road Transport Corporation, which is established to be false,” the court noted.
Though MACT had found the driver’s negligence caused accident and held the KSRTC liable to pay compensation, the court found that false stand taken by the KSRTC had delayed in paying compensation in the accident case.
The court also directed the MD to initiate disciplinary action against the errant officials in such instances.
