Telangana High Court
WP/24527/2004 of S.Gangadhri Vs The Depot Manager, AP.SRTC., 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 : 24527 of 2004 Between: S.Gangadhri S/o Gangappa Adapale Street, Kadiri Anantapur
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 : 24527 of 2004
Between:
S.Gangadhri S/o Gangappa Adapale Street, Kadiri Anantapur District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Depot Manager, AP.SRTC., Kadiri Depot, Kadiri, Anantapur 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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the respondents in imposing major penaltyvide proceedings No.01/2(2)/97-KDR. dt. 4/07/1997 and dt. 28/10/1997 withoutconducting enquiry as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, unsustainable, contrary tolaw and in violation of principle of natural justice and set aside the same andconsequently direct the respondent to add two annual incrments to the pay ofthe petitioner.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAMA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent: MR.P.VINAYAKA SWAMY (SC FOR APSRTC)
The Court at the admission stage, made the following:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24527 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 17-05-1997 for having caused an accident to thevehicle bearing Regn.No.AP10Z 1936 driven by him and after receiving theexplanation of the petitioner, the final orders were passed on 28-10-1997imposing the penalty of withholding of one incremental stage for a period of twoyears with cumulative effect. The petitioner questioned the order on the groundthat though there is reduction of annual increment for a period of two years 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 7 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 two years without cumulativeeffect. 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 two years 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, AP.SRTC., Kadiri Depot, Kadiri, Anantapur District.
2. 2 C.D copies.