Telangana High Court
WP/24871/2004 of S.K.Karimullah Vs The Depot Manager APSRTC on 30 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 24871 of 2004 Between: S.K.Kareemullah S/o Sadiq Ali, Aged 39 years, Ex-Daily Wage Driver,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION No. 24871 of 2004
Between:
S.K.Kareemullah S/o Sadiq Ali,Aged 39 years, Ex-Daily Wage Driver, (E211098) APSRTC, Ranigunj I bus Depot, Hyderabad.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Depot Manager APSRTC Ranigunj I Depot Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toIssue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring that the action of the respondent in deleting the name of thepetitioner from approved/selected candidates list of Driver Post is bad, arbitrary,illegal, unjust, unreasonable and against to the principles of natural justice by settingaside the final order No.P2/1(19)-2003-RNG-1 dt. 08/10/2003 and consequentlydirect the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD
The Court at the admission stage 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:
Challenging the action of the respondent in deleting the name of thepetitioner from the approved selection list through proceedings dated08.10.2003, the present writ petition is filed.
The petitioner worked as a Casual Driver in the respondentCorporation. He was selected as a Driver in the year 1999 throughthe selection committee.
The petitioner contends that he fell sick and could not attend hisduties from 25.04.2003 to 02.05.2003 and again from 04.05.2003 to08.05.2003, and he informed the same to the Depot authorities. Acharge memo was issued to him and he submitted his explanation.He further contends that without conducting any regular departmentalenquiry, his name was deleted from the approved selection list andtherefore, the respondent Corporation have violated the principles ofnatural justice. Hence the present writ petition is filed.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner was selected on the basis ofregular selection. His services were being utilized as casual Driver asand when required. Without conducting any departmental enquiry, hisname was deleted from the approved selection list.
Under the similar circumstances, a Division Bench of this Courtgave a judgment on 29.08.2003 in Writ Appeal No.1259 of 2003,upholding the order of the learned single Judge who held that it is notpermissible for the Corporation to remove the name of the workmanfrom the selected list, when the selection was made through aregularly constituted board. In the present case also, if theCorporation comes to a conclusion that non-reporting to dutyamounts to dereliction of duty, the Corporation is at liberty to initiateaction against the petitioner and after a detailed inquiry, may passappropriate orders according to Rules, but, without giving anyopportunity, removing the name of the petitioner from the list ofselected candidates is against the principles of natural justice. Theaction of the respondent in removing the name of the petitioner fromthe list of selected candidates is arbitrary. Therefore, such action isliable to be corrected by directing the respondent to restore the name of the petitioner to the selection list.
In the light of the above circumstances, the action of the respondentin deleting the name of the petitioner from the list of selectedcandidates is quashed. The respondent is directed to restore thename of the petitioner into the list of selected candidates andcontinue to engage him as he used to be engaged previously till an action, if any, taken by therespondent for the absence of the petitioner and the punishment, ifany, going to be imposed.
With the above said observations, the Writ Petition is allowed. Noorder as to costs.
dsr
To:
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1. The Depot Manager, APSRTC,
Conclusion
Ranigunj I Bus Depot, Hyderabad
2. Two CD copies.