WP/23239/1999 of V.ALWARIAH, Vs A.P.S.R.T.C. on 30 December 2005

ORAL ORDER:

This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the sole respondent inwithholding a part of terminal benefits payable to petitioner.

The petitioner herein who was working with the respondent corporation asConductor, retired from service on 31.8.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation.The only grievance of the petitioner is that at the time of his retirement his retirementbenefits were not settled and 10% of the Gratuity, salary payable for the Month ofAugust, 1998 and leave encashment amounts were withheld. Hence, the presentwrit petition.

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that as on the date of retirement ofpetitioner, no charge memo was issued to the petitioner nor any departmentalproceedings were pending against him and the action of the respondents inwithholding the retrial benefits is unjustified and illegal.

A counter affidavit was filed stating that while the petitioner was working as DepotClerk at Macherla Bus Depot, he along with others was involved in misappropriationof Rs.97,701.50 and after enquiry a charge sheet dated 22.4.1998 was issued to thepetitioner and the same was acknowledged by the petitioner on 22.5.1998. It is alsostated that at the time of retirement the petitioner has not handed over the charge tohis successor officer as such letter dated 4.3.1999 and 4.5.1999 were issued askingthe petitioner to hand over the charge and alleged that petitioner neither handedover the charge nor submitted any explanation. Precisely it is stated that due topendency of the departmental proceedings against the petitioner, and since thepetitioner has not handed over the charge to his successor officer, 10 % gratuity,salary for the month of August and leave encashment were withheld.

The learned Standing Counsel for respondent corporation submitted that therespondent corporation is willing to conclude the enquiry expeditiously and to passfinal orders in accordance with law and petitioner may be directed to cooperate inthe enquiry proceedings. Learned counsel for petitioner agreed for the same.

Since the enquiry against the petitioner is pending and respondent corporation iswilling to conclude the same expeditiously, without going into the merits of thematter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to issue propernotice of enquiry to the petitioner and complete the enquiry within a period of eightweeks thereafter and pass appropriate final orders in accordance with lawexpeditiously. It is needless to observe that the petitioner is at liberty to challengethe final orders, if he is so aggrieved.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

_____________

N.V.RAMANA,J

30.12.2005

TVK

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA

WRIT PETITION NO : 23239 of 1999

DATED: 30.12.2005