WRIT PETITION 28680 on 22 September 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY jl?

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

WRIT PETITION NO: 28680 OF 2012

Between:

K.S.Narayana,S/o.SriRamulu,Aged52years,Occ:Conductor,E.No.484367,D.No.6-55-149,ReddikaStreet,Santhapeta,Thagarapuvillage, Bheemili Mandal, Visakhapatnam.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Rep: by its MD, RTC XRoads, Hyderabad.Roads, Hyderabad.

2. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Hyderabad.

3. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Visakhapatnam.

4. The Rural Divisional Manager, Visakhapatnam.

5. The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Visakhapatnam.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that inthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly, onein the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondentsin reducing the basic pay, increments and deducting[an][ amount][ of][ Rs.500/-]per month from the petitioner salary and also in not passing any orders onthe appealsubmittedto the 2ndrespondent on 05.03.2012asillegal,arbitrary, without authority of law, against the principles of natural justiceand unconstitutional and consequently directed the respondents to pay thededucted the amount also restore the petitioner basic pay and incrementwhich were reduced without issuing any notice.

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2012rWPMP. NO: 36581 OF 2012)

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the[circumstances]stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the respondents to stay the deduction[of][ amount][ from]petitioner salary, pending disposal of the writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. SRIDHAR TUMMALAPUDI

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VINOD KUMAR TARLADA(SC[FOR]APSRTC.PNV)

The Court made the following Order:

I

f

/

APHC010777122012

0jgIN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHATAMARAVATI[3457]SS(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVEPRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

WRIT PETITION NO: 28680/2012

Between:

K.s.narayana,

...PETITIONER

AND

The A P State Road Transport Corporation ...RESPONDENT(S)

and Others

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.SRIDHAR TUMMALAPUDI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):1.K. SARALA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC,PNV)

HN, JW.P,No.28680 2012

The Court made the following Order:

The petitioner is challenging the imposition of punishmentinvolving the reduction in basic pay, increments, and the deductionof an amount of Rs.500/- per month from the petitioner’s salary andhe is also challenging the inaction of the respondents in disposingof the appeal dated 05.03.2012.

2.Thelearned counselforthepetitioner submitsthatthepetitioner joined the respondent corporation as a conductor in theyear 1989, and his services were regularized in the year 1991.Thepetitioner was charged with cash andticket irregularity,andacharge meme dated 22.09.2009 was issued to the petitioner,Anenquiry was conducted, and a show cause notice dated 10.02.2010was issued, calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation.The petitioner submitted an appeal on 15.03.2010, followed byrepresentations dated 26.05.2010 and 05.03.2012.The learnedcounselforthepetitioner submitsthatthesaidappealandrepresentations have not been disposedof or decidedbytherespondents. The said acts of the respondents, in not deciding theappeal of the petitioner and in deducting an amount of Rs.500/-permonth from his salary, are under challenge.

3.The learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondentssubmits that the respondents have conducted a detailed enquiryand the enquiry officer found the petitioner guilty of the charges ofmisconduct.Finalorderswerepassedon17.02.2010.Itissubmitted that the orders dated 17.02.2010 is not under challenge.Itis also submittedby the learned Standing counselthatthepetitioner was involved in similar cash and ticket irregularitiesontwo earlier occasions, and punishments of deferment of incrementwere imposed on the petitioner on those occasions as well.

4.In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits thatthe order dated 17.02.2010 was not served on the petitioner.ThepetitionerhasapproachedthisCourtwithoutinvokingthejurisdictionof the competent Labour Court.TheLabour Courtwould be the competent forum to go into the issue of the rationalityand proportionality of the punishment imposed on the petitioner andto give a finding on the facts.the order dated 17.02.2010 was not served on the petitioner.ThepetitionerhasapproachedthisCourtwithoutinvokingthejurisdictionof the competent Labour Court.TheLabour Courtwould be the competent forum to go into the issue of the rationalityand proportionality of the punishment imposed on the petitioner andto give a finding on the facts.

5.Considering the fact that the petitioner approached[this][ Court]directly,this Courtisnotinclinedto entertain thewritpetition.However,it is open for the petitioner to take steps if the petitioner isaggrieved by the order dated 17.02.2010.directly,this Courtisnotinclinedto entertain thewritpetition.However,it is open for the petitioner to take steps if the petitioner isaggrieved by the order dated 17.02.2010.

f

HN,JW.P,No.28680_2012

4

6.With these observations, the writ petition is closed.Thereshall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/- A. VENU GOPAL RAO//TRUE COPY//ASSISTANT REGISTRARSECTION OFFICER

To,

1. One CC to Sri. Sridhar Tummalapudi Advocate [OPUC]

2.One CC to Sri. Vinod Kumar Tarlada(SC for APSRTC,PNV) [OPUC]3.Three CD Copies vna HIGH COURT

DATED: 17/02/2025