Telangana High Court
WP/24608/2004 of - Vs - on 29 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24608 of 2004 Between: A.Anjaneyulu, S/o.Ashanna, Hindu, 46 years, Driver (E-280478),
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANUWRIT PETITION NO : 24608 of 2004
Between:
A.Anjaneyulu, S/o.Ashanna,
Hindu, 46 years, Driver (E-280478),
Wanaparthy Bus Depot, Mahababnagar District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Depot Manager,APSRTC, Wanaparthy Bus Depot, Mahabubnagar 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 pleasedto issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ ofmandamus declaring that the action of the respondent in imposing thepunishment of with-holding of annual increment for a period of one year whichshall have effect on petitioners future increments as illegal, arbitrary, unjustand unreasonable and violative of principles of natural justice and also contraryto the judgments of this Hon’ble Court and also the Apex Court by setting asidethe final order No.01/2(3)/94-WNP dated 19-09-1996 of the respondent hereinand consequently direct the respondent to add the increments which were withholdee.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. MR.P.VINAYAKA SWAMY .
The Court at the admission stage, made the following :
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24608 of 2004
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 petitioner is working as a driver in the respondent-Corporation. Hewas issued a charge memo on 12-04-1994 for having caused an accident to thevehicle bearing Regn.No.AP10Z 2850 driven by him and after receiving theexplanation of the petitioner, the final orders were passed on 19-09-1996imposing the penalty of withholding of one incremental stage for a period of oneyear with cumulative effect. The petitioner questioned the order on the groundthat though there is reduction of annual increment for a period of one year withcumulative effect is a major penalty, the respondent passed the impugned orderwithout conducting any enquiry as required under the rules. Therefore, theorder is illegal and it is liable to be set aside.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on a judgment of the SupremeCourt in Kulwant Singh Gill v. State of Punjab[1] wherein the Supreme Courtheld that since the punishment imposed on the petitioner is a majorpunishment, the order cannot be sustained without an enquiry. The petitionertherefore seeks to declare that the order is illegal and it is liable to be set aside.
3. The petitioner after receiving the adverse orders slept over the matterfor a period of 10 years. There are latches on his part in asserting his rightregarding this issue. Though the impugned order is liable to be set aside, onaccount of long lapse of time in filing the writ petition and in view of thejudgment of the Supreme Court in Kulwant Singh Gill (1 supra), I am of theview that it would be appropriate if the punishment imposed on the petitioner istreated as reduction of one annual increment for one year without cumulative effect. The petitioner is not entitled for the difference of the amount, if any, byvirtue of this order for the period from the date of the impugned order till thedate of this order. But, he is entitled to get increments on notional calculationfrom the date of this order to which he is entitled, as he had not been imposedpenalty of reduction of one annual increment for one year without cumulativeeffect.
4. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the above observations. Inthe circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
Kvr December 29, 2004
To
___________________
1. The Depot Manager,
APSRTC, Wanaparthy Bus Depot,
Mahabubnagar District.
2. 2 C.D copies.