Telangana High Court
WP/24273/2004 of T.Prameela Vs The Depot Manager, on 27 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 24273 of 2004 Between: T.Prameela W/o.R.Ashok Rao, Aged about 32 years,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION No. 24273 of 2004
Between:
T.Prameela W/o.R.Ashok Rao,
Aged about 32 years, Occ:Ex-Conductor,
R/o.H.No.853 D BHEL Ramchandrapuram,
Medak District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Depot Manager, A.S.R.T.C.
H.C.U Depot, Rangareddy District.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a writ order, or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari, calling forthe records vide the proceedings No.02/95(66)/2004 H.C.U Dt.6.12.2004 passed bythe Respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and violation of theprinciples of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate thepetitioner into service immediately along with all consequential benefits, and passsuch any other order or orders.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.THIRUPATHI REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD, Standing Counsel The Court at the stage of admission made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The grievance of the writ petitioner is that her name was deleted fromselection list without conducting any enquiry. Challenging theproceedings No.02/95(66)/2004-HCU, dated 06.12.2004, the presentwrit petition is filed.
The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the name of thepetitioner has been deleted from the selection list without conductingany enquiry and therefore, principles of natural justice have beenviolated.
On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for therespondent contended that several instructions have been given tothe writ petitioner to improve her performance, but she did notimprove her performance. Therefore, the order under challenge doesnot suffer from any legal infirmities and does not call for anyinterference.
It is not disputed before this Court that the selection of the petitionerwas made under regular selection process. The checking officialsfound certain irregularities on the part of the petitioner at the time ofcheck on 23.10.2004, and after calling explanation from thepetitioner, the name of the petitioner was deleted from the selectionlist without conducting any enquiry. No reasonable opportunity isafforded to the writ petitioner in proving her case, and withoutconducting any departmental enquiry, the impugned proceedingshave been passed. Hence the impugned proceedings suffer fromlegal infirmities and there is violation of principles of natural justice.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugnedproceedings are set aside. This order will not preclude the respondent in conducting departmental enquiry against the petitionerin respect of the alleged irregularities in accordance with rules andregulations of the Corporation. No order as to costs.
dsr
_________
27.12.2004
To:
1. The Depot Manager, APSRTC,
H.C.U.Depot, Rangareddy District
2. Two CD copies.