IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16848 of 2008 Between: S.L.Raju, E-750334, Driver, S/o. Jagga Rao Maddilapalem Depot, R/o. Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C. rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Visakhapatnam Region at Visakhapatnam. 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam 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 may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in suspending the petitioner from service on the allegation of involvement causing Fatal Accident during pendency of Criminal Case on the very same set of facts vide F.I.R.No.110/2008 on the ﬁle of III town P.S. Visakhapatnam City, vide Proc. No:P2/2(06)/2008-MDP, dt.3.7.2008 and proposing to conduct enquiry, during pendency of Criminal Case as illegal, without jurisdiction, unjust and arbitrary and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondents: MR. K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16848 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Driver in Maddilapalem Depot of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Visakhapatnam District. On 11.05.2008, he was driving a bus on the route from Maddilapalem to Railway Station. He was issued a charge sheet dated 03.07.2008 by the 3rd respondent- Depot Manager, Maddilapalem Depot, alleging that a motor cycle, on which a girl by name Lakshmi Priya, aged about 8 years, was traveling as a pillion rider, hit an oncoming auto rickshaw and, as a result, the girl fell down and she came under the rear wheel of the bus driven by the petitioner leading to her death. It was also alleged that the petitioner did not stop the bus even after the accident. On the same day, the 3rd respondent placed the petitioner under suspension through a separate order. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the charge sheet as well as the order of suspension. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. So far as the charge sheet is concerned, the petitioner had to submit his explanation and the allegations made therein are required to be proved in the domestic enquiry. This Court is not convinced to interfere with the same, since no inﬁrmity is pointed out in relation thereto. The petitioner is placed under suspension on the allegation that the pillion rider on a motor cycle fell down as a consequence of hitting the auto rickshaw and came under the rear wheel of the bus driven by the petitioner. The petitioner contends that no accident as such had taken place when he was driving the bus. Even if the allegation against the petitioner is to be taken on its face value for the present, it cannot be said that the petitioner is responsible for the occurrence of the accident. At any rate, that is a matter to be decided in the enquiry. This Court is of the view that the allegation itself is very remote against the petitioner. It is not in the interest of the Corporation or the petitioner to place him under suspension. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed setting aside the order, dated 03.07.2008, passed by the 3rd respondent, suspending the petitioner from service. The petitioner shall be reinstated and it shall be open to the respondents to proceed with the departmental enquiry on the basis of the charge sheet. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY 5th August, 2008. Note:- Issue CC in three days. BO IBL