IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14563 of 2008 Between: E. Hanmanth Reddy S/o. Venkat Reddy E-151188, Casual Conductor, APSRTC, Narayanapet Depot, aged 50 yrs R/o. Post & Mandal, Bijnapally Tq. Nagarkurnool Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Narayanpet Depot, Mahaboobnagar District at Narayanpet. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriat writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the issuance of the impugned proceedings bearing No. 02/95 (32)/08-NRPT dt. 30-5-2008 as being contrary to law, violative of the principels of natural justuce and violative of Right to Life, Disproportionate to the commission of offence as embodied under Articles 14,15,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of the circular instructions issued by the Head Office in the process of conducting enquiry and consequently direct the respondent herein to conduct afresh the enquiry after following due process of law while setting aside the impugned orders and to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.TULASI DAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14563 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Conductor on casual basis in Narayanpet Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. On 25.03.2008, while he was conducting a bus on the route from Atmakur to Marikal, a check took place and it was found that the petitioner resorted to certain cash and ticket irregularities. A charge sheet was issued on 30.05.2008, alleging that the petitioner had collected fare from certain passengers and issued used tickets. Through a separate order passed on the same day, the petitioner was put off duty, which is equivalent to suspension pending enquiry. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard Sri S.Tulasi Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. B.G.Uma Devi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. Before the petitioner was put off duty and charge sheet was issued, a preliminary enquiry was conducted. As many as five charges were framed against the petitioner and in three of them, the allegation is that the petitioner had issued used tickets. The truth or otherwise of the said charges needs to be examined at the departmental enquiry. It cannot be said that there was no basis for the respondent to put the petitioner off duty. The interests of the petitioner can be protected, by directing the respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. It is however directed that the respondent shall conclude the disciplinary proceedings, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly giving opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his case and furnishing the documents, on which reliance is placed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 08.07.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14563 of 2008 Date: 08.07.2008 JSU