IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO. 15225 of 2009 Between: Adavi Mohan Rao S/o.Anjaneyulu R/o.Selapadu Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C. represented by its Managing Director, R.T.C. Cross Roads, Chikkadpalli, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Tenali Depot, Tenali, Guntur District. 3 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Guntur, Guntur 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 a Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner with out holding any enquiry and by attaching stigma vide proceedings No.02/95[02]/09-TNL, dated 15.01.2009, which was confirmed by the 3rd respondent in proceedings No.PA/19[/4]/08-RM[G] dated 27.06.2009 in the appeal filed by the petitioner on 17.02.2009 as arbitrary illegal and were passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to service with continuity of service and back wages. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G.VIJAYA BABU Counsel for the Respondents : SRI K.MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in terminating the services of the petitioner without holding any enquiry and by attaching stigma vide proceedings No.02/95(2)/09.TNL, dated 15.01.2009 which was confirmed by respondent No.3 in proceedings No.PA/19(24)/09-RM(G) dated 27.06.2009 in the appeal filed by the petitioner on 17.02.2009 as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct respondent No.2 to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and back wages. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner, who was working as a Contract Driver, was served with a charge memo on 04.01.2009 stating that he has involved in certain malpractices i.e., collecting money without issuing any ticket. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was terminated from the service by an order dated 15.01.2009 passed by respondent No.2. Questioning the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the third respondent, who dismissed the same on 27.06.2009. As against the said order of dismissal from service, the petitioner approached this Court and filed this writ petition contending that the orders passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 are violative of Principles of Natural Justice, as the petitioner was not given any opportunity to defend himself. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent. 4. In W.P.No.8685 of 2001 dated 21.08.2001, this Court has taken the view that any action such as dismissal or removal from service shall be only after following due procedure under law i.e., holding an enquiry, etc. May be the petitioner herein is working as a driver on contract basis, but it does not mean that his services can be terminated without following due procedure under law. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the order dated 15.01.2009 dismissing the petitioner from service as confirmed by the appellate authority on 27.06.2009, is liable to be set aside. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the order dated 15.01.2009, passed by the 2nd respondent and as confirmed by the 3rd respondent by his order dated 27.06.2009 are hereby set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law, if they so choose. _____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 29th July, 2009 KL/KSH