IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 5847 of 2008 Between: Yerra Venkata Subba Rao, E. 351003, S/o. Surya Rao, Nallazerla Post & Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Vice Chairman & Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Tanuku Depot, West Godavari District. 3 The Deputy Chief Traffice Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., West Godavari Region, Eluru, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceeding No. 02/5 (105)/07-TNK Dated 2-2-2008 of the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural Justice in violatin of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to service with continuity of service and all other benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.D.GOWD Counsel for the Respondents: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Driver in Tanuku Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. On 16.08.2007, he was entrusted with the duty of driving the one man service from Tanuku to Raichur via Rajahmundry. It was to be run as an ordinary bus between Tanuku and Rajahmundry and as express between Rajahmundry and Raichur. For the first spell, the tickets were to be issued in the form of slips, from books containing ten folios each. The petitioner is said to have lost a booklet containing five folios. After returning from Raichur, the petitioner deposited the cost of the lost folios. A charge sheet, dated 26.08.2007, was issued and the petitioner was also placed under suspension on the same day. After holding the departmental enquiry, the Depot Manager, the second respondent, passed an order, dated 02.02.2008, directing removal of the petitioner from service. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the third respondent. The same is pending. The petitioner challenges the order of removal by raising several grounds, particularly by placing reliance upon a judgment rendered by this Court in Ch.P.REDDY v A.P.S.R.T.C., HYDERABAD[1]. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Admittedly, the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending and this Court did not adjudicate upon the merits of the matter. It is no doubt true that in Ch.P.Reddy’s case, it was held that whenever allegation against an employee of the A.P.S.R.T.C. is about loss of tickets, the Corporation could only recover the printing charges. There is no reason to doubt that the appellate authority would not take this aspect into account. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to canvass all his grounds before the appellate authority, which, in turn, shall take the same into account, while disposing of the appeal. The appeal shall be disposed of within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ 19.03.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} [1] 2000 (5) ALD 93