THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.587 OF 2005 DATED 29TH JANUARY, 2010 BETWEEN S.Jameeluddin (E.252506) … Petitioner And A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Nizamabad Region, Nizamabad, Rep. by its Regional Manager. And Others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.587 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioner, a Conductor in the service of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short, ‘the APSRTC’), challenges the disciplinary action initiated against him whereby he was imposed with the punishment of reduction of pay to the minimum of the time scale applicable to Conductors Grade-II for a period of two years with cumulative effect. He seeks a further direction to restore his pay scale along with all consequential benefits. The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the APSRTC on 01.03.1989 and his services as such were regularized with effect from 01.08.1994. He was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in respect of his unauthorized absence from duty from July to October, 1997. It is his case that he suffered from Hepatitic Dysentery during July, 1997 and had to undergo treatment in the Government Civil Hospital, Armoor. He claims to have reported for duty on 06.11.1997 along with the Medical Fitness Certificate issued by the Deputy Civil Surgeon, Government Civil Hospital, Armoor. However, he was not allowed to join duty and on the other hand, he was informed that basing on the charge sheet dated 17.10.1997 issued by the APSRTC in respect of his unauthorized absence from 17.07.1997 upto 17.10.1997, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. Acting upon the report submitted by the Enquiry Officer, the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Armoor Depot, issued the proceedings dated 16.05.1998 removing the petitioner from service. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager, Nizamabad, which was dismissed by Order dated 15.02.1999. Thereupon, he carried the matter by way of a review before the Regional Manager, APSRTC, Nizamabad and by Order dated 03.05.1999 the Reviewing Authority modified the punishment of removal from service to that of reduction of his pay to the minimum of the time scale applicable to Conductors Grade-II for a period of two years with cumulative effect. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. It is however to be seen that the primary order dated 16.05.1998 passed by the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Armoor Depot, clearly evidences that the charge sheet dated 17.10.1997 which was sent to the petitioner by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due, was returned by the Postal Authorities with the endorsement that the addressee was absent continuously for seven days. Similarly, the Enquiry Officer’s letter dated 10.01.1998 calling upon the petitioner to attend the enquiry met with the same fate. It is therefore, manifest that the APSRTC took all possible steps to intimate the petitioner of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. Even according to the petitioner, as culled out from his averments in the writ affidavit, he was hospitalized for a period of four months and it is his claim that he reported for duty on 06.11.1997. That being so, there is no explanation as to why he failed to receive the letter of the Enquiry Officer sent in January, 1998. The petitioner cannot therefore make out a case that the disciplinary action taken against him is vitiated on the ground that he was not afforded an opportunity at the stage of enquiry. It is the case of the petitioner that the APSRTC ought not to have ignored the factum of his sickness, evidenced by the Medical Certificate from the Government Civil Hospital, Armoor and hence, the punishment imposed upon him was wholly unjustified. It may well be that the petitioner was in fact sick as claimed by him and as evidenced by the Medical Certificate issued by the Government Civil Hospital, Armoor. However, the issue for consideration was not whether the petitioner was actually sick during the said period but whether the petitioner was guilty of the charge of unauthorized absence. Relevant to note, it is not the case of the petitioner that he took any steps to inform the APSRTC of his illness during the period July, 1997 to October, 1997. In the light of the petitioner absconding from duty without reason, this Court finds no irregularity in the initiation of disciplinary proceedings by way of the charge sheet dated 17.10.1997 in respect of his unauthorized absence. The orders of the Primary Authority and the Appellate Authority clearly indicate that the said Authorities considered the matter at length and came to the conclusion that the charge levelled against the petitioner was duly proved. However, it appears that the Reviewing Authority took a lenient view in the matter keeping in mind the long service rendered by the petitioner and accordingly modified the punishment of his removal from service. In such circumstances, no case is made out for interference by this Court with the disciplinary action taken by the APSRTC against the petitioner. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 29th January, 2010. VGSR