HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28365 OF 2010 ORDER: Petitioner was appointed as Conductor in the year 1986 in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. Recently, he was adjudged as the ‘Best Conductor’ in Visakhapatnam Urban Division and the Regional Manager issued a certificate to that effect on 26-01- 2006. It is stated that throughout the length of service, the petitioner was not issued any charge sheet, much less, any departmental enquiry was conducted. 2. The Depot Manager, Waltair, 3rd respondent herein, issued a charge sheet, dated 26-10-2010, alleging that when the bus, being conducted by the petitioner on 20-10-2010 was checked, it was found that the petitioner did not collect the fare from a passenger and tat he issued luggage tickets for 6 units, instead of 16 units to another passenger. On the same day, the 3rd respondent passed an order placing the petitioner under suspension. The same is challenged. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 4. If the petitioner did not face any disciplinary proceedings for the past 24 years of service rendered by him, it must be said to his credit. The Regional Manager had issued a letter of appreciation in the year 2006, duly citing the reasons. In case, the petitioner is found to have colleted fare and failed to issue tickets, certainly, the 3rd respondent was entitled to place him under suspension, apart from initiating disciplinary proceedings. 5. The allegation made against the petitioner in the charge sheet is that he failed collect the fare and issue tickets to a passenger and that he issued luggage tickets for 6 units instead of 16 units. It appears that the checking officials were waiting for an occasion to implicate the petitioner. The basis, on which the luggage was treated as 16 units, is not even mentioned. That, however is a matter, that needs to be examined in the domestic enquiry. Further, it is not known as to when the passenger, mentioned in the charge sheet, has boarded the bus. It was not even alleged that the petitioner had collected the fare but failed to issue tickets. This Court finds that there is absolutely no basis for the 3rd respondent to place the petitioner under suspension. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J November 23, 2010. KTL