Pepsu Road Transport Corp vs Rawel Singh on 29 February, 2008
17. Learned counsel representing the respondent Corporation,
however, submits that the conduct of the petitioner by itself debars him from
pleading unfairness on the part of the respondents. It is categorically submitted based
on the decision rendered in the case of PEPSU RTC v. Rawal Singh, 2008(4) SCC
42 with emphasis on paragraph 16 that a deliberate non-cooperation on the part of
-8-
the delinquent will not amount to violation of the principles of natural justice. The
allegation of malafide was more made than made out because the petitioner as a
matter of strategy decided to allege malafide against all Managing Directors who
decided to take action against him for his omission and commission. The bias alleged
was only a smokescreen created by the petitioner to stonewall all proceedings at
every stage and there was a pre-determined plan on the part of the petitioner not to
cooperate or participate in the proceeding and the same would be evident from the
number of writ applications which came to be filed by the petitioner challenging
every action of the respondents at every stage. The petitioner has many things to say
with regard to the orders which have come to be passed in his favour but maintains
total silence on such orders which went against him. Learned counsel also submits
on the basis of the record that the petitioner had no respect for the orders of the High
Court. When the petitioner moved the High Court against his order of transfer and
the High Court refused to grant any relief and directed the petitioner to join his place
of posting by specified date, he refused to do so. Even the observations of the
Division Bench did not coax the petitioner from ignoring the directions of joining his
place of posting and it was in this background and open defiance of law and
authority that the enquiry in question based on the charge-sheet contained in
Anenxure-3 came to be issued and the enquiry conducted.