IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9696 of 2008 Between: A.Bushaiah S/o. Sundaraiah R/o. Khaja, besides Nagarjuna University, Mangalagiri, Guntur Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Guntur Region, Guntur Dist. 2 The Divisional Manager, APSRTC, Guntur Region, Guntur Dist. 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Guntur - I Bus Depot, Guntur Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not fixing the pay of the petitioenr by adding yearly increments till the date of retirement i.e. 30-9-2005 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to fix the pay the petitioner by adding yearly increment till the date of retirement i.e. 30-9-2005 and to pay the terminal benefits and consequential benefits to the petitioners and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9696 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Driver in Guntur-I Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. Vide orders, dated 03.01.2003, the 3rd respondent imposed the punishment of postponement of annual increments for a period of two years with cumulative effect. In the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the period was reduced to 18 months. The petitioner retired from service on 30.09.2005. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the period of punishment expired by July 2004, he was not extended the benefit of increments till he retired from service, and that the same has reflected upon the retirement benefits. The petitioner claims to have made a representation, dated 17.09.2007, and complains that no action has been taken thereon. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The punishment of stoppage of increments for a period of two years with cumulative effect imposed by the 3rd respondent was reduced to that of 18 months in the order passed by the appellate authority. On expiry of the said period, the increments are to be restored to the petitioner, though the impact of stoppage would have its affect for the remaining period also. The question as to whether the salary of the petitioner was to be revised on expiry of the period of 18 months, needs to be examined by the respondents. Unless the calculations are made properly, the petitioner would be subjected to serious financial loss, in his retirement benefits. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to examine the representation, dated 17.09.2007, submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, 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. _________ 29.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9696 of 2008 Date: 29.04.2008 JSU