HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 6465 of 2001 ORDER: The proceedings of the Depot Manager, Karimnagar-II, dated 02.09.2000, whereby the petitioner was imposed the penalty of recovery of Rs.16,972/-, is under challenge in this Writ Petition as being arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner is a Conductor with the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC). While discharging his duties as a Conductor of bus bearing No.APZ.20-5979 from Karimnagar to Sirpur, on the intervening night of 22/23.04.1999, the petitioner lost a block of tickets worth Rs.16,972/-. He claims to have given a police complaint on 23.04.1999 to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sirpur regarding the theft of the express tickets block from the bus. The second respondent issued charge memo dated 07.05.1999 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the penalty of recovery of Rs.16,972/- should not be imposed on him since it had been established in the enquiry that he was negligent in the discharge of his duties in having lost the tickets block. Thereafter, the impugned order of punishment came to be passed. Sri P.V.Srinivasa Rao, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that even if the charge of negligence is established, para 40.07.2 of the Operation Manual of the APSRTC specifically provides that only the loss suffered by the APSRTC towards the cost of paper, printing and stacking was liable to be recovered, and not the face value of the tickets lost. In the present case, the petitioner has neither been charged of having issued tickets from the said block nor is it the case of the APSRTC that, on account of the tickets block being lost, the tickets therein were misused by others resulting in loss of revenue to the APSRTC. The only charge levelled against the petitioner is of negligence in having lost the tickets block, and nothing more. This Court, in Ch.P.Reddy v. APSRTC, Hyderabad[1], after referring to clauses 40.06 and 40.07 of the Operation Manual, held that in cases where the APSRTC has not suffered loss of the amount which the tickets could fetch if they were sold to the passengers travelling in the buses, and if the loss suffered by the APSRTC was only towards the cost of paper, printing and stacking, it is only this amount which could be recovered and not the face value of the tickets. Following the said judgment, the impugned order is quashed. It is made clear that it is open to the APSRTC to recover the cost of paper, printing and stacking of the tickets block from the petitioner. In case the APSRTC has adequate evidence to establish that the tickets, from the lost tickets block, has been misused it is open to them to cause necessary enquiry and take action against the petitioner to the extent of such loss caused by misuse of the tickets from the tickets block. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is allowed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:25.11.2010 usd [1] 2000(5) ALD 93