Telangana High Court
WP/27010/2006 of J.P. Rao S/o Narayana Rao Vs APSRTC., repby Regional manager, on 28 December 2006
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 27010 of 2006 DATED: 28.12.2006 Between: J.P.Rao petitioner And The APSRTC Rep by its Regional Manager, Adilabad Region, Adilabad and another Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA WRIT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 27010of2006
DATED: 28.12.2006
Between:
J.P.Rao petitioner
And
The APSRTCRep by its Regional Manager,Adilabad Region, Adilabad and another Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO. 27010 of 2006
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.
ORAL ORDER:
The petitioner is working as a Conductor in the respondent-APSRTC. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated againsthim, alleging cash and ticket irregularities. On the basis of the reportsubmitted by the checking officials, a charge sheet dated 12.6.2001was issued and petitioner was suspended pending enquiry. Thepetitioner submitted his explanation dated 22.6.2001. The enquiryofficer submitted his report dated 5.7.2001 holding the petitioner guiltyof the charges leveled against him. Based on the report of the enquiryofficer, without issuing a show cause notice, proceedings dated27.7.2001 were issued imposing the punishment of reducing the payof the petitioner by two incremental stages for a period of two yearswith cumulative effect. The petitioner submitted hiscomments/objections to the enquiry report, however, withoutconsidering the same the impugned order was passed. Hence, thepetitioner filed the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondentNo.2, without furnishing copy of enquiry report and without affordingany opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, straight away issued theimpugned proceedings imposing punishment of reducing the pay ofthe petitioner by two incremental stages for a period of two years withcumulative effect. He further submitted that the issue raised in this writpetition is squarely covered by the orders of this Court in W.P. No.18299 of 2005, dated 05.09.2005. Learned Standing Counsel for therespondents-Corporation admitted the same. He, however, opposedthe relief contending that after considering the entire material onrecord, the impugned order was passed, and no interference is calledfor therewith.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Corporation.
The issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely coveredby the orders of this Court in W.P. 18299 of 2005, dated 05.09.2005.Hence, following the orders of this Court in W.P. No. 18299 of 2005,dated 05.09.2005, the present writ petition is also disposed of with thefollowing direction.
The impugned order dated 27.7.2001, passed by respondentNo.2, imposing punishment of reduction of pay by two incrementalstages for a period of two years with cumulative effect, is modified tothat of reduction of pay of the petitioner by two incremental stages for aperiod of two years without cumulative effect. However, the petitionershall not be entitled to any monetary benefits arising out of this order,but shall be entitled to fixation of pay only.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
DATE: 28.12.2006Tvk
_____________
N.V.RAMANA,J
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 27010of2006DATED: 28.12.2006