THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8642 of 1999 Dated:06.02.2008 Between P.Ramachandra Naidu …..Petitioner and Managing Director, AP State Housing Corporation Ltd., Hyderabad. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.8642 of 1999 ORDER This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by proceedings No.A4/3829/94 dated 1.4.1999 issued by the respondent as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, while working as Technical Work Inspector at Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State Housing Corporation Limited, was transferred to Mahaboobnagar District and was relieved from duties. However, he did not report at Mahaboobnagar as required under the transfer and relieving orders. It appears that the petitioner challenged the transfer order and this Court set aside the same holding it as illegal. However, the petitioner neither reported at Mahaboobnagar nor shown any genuine reason for his absence for a period of nine months. After the petitioner was permitted to join duty at Chittoor as the writ petition was allowed, he was proceeded with departmentally for his absence for a period of nine months and after conducting a detailed enquiry into the same, he was imposed with a punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that once the transfer order which was held to be illegal by this Court is set aside, the position as on date of transfer must be taken into consideration and whether the petitioner was relieved from duty or not, it must be deemed that the petitioner was working at Chittoor. Therefore, the respondent could not have proceeded with departmentally for the absence of the petitioner for nine months i.e., from the date of passing of relieving order to the date of disposal of the writ petition and no action could have been initiated against him. It is difficult to accept the submission made by the petitioner. May be, there was an illegal order of transfer but that does not mean that the petitioner could have absented from duty for a period of nine months waiting for result of the writ petition. However, coming to the merits of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was passed without conducting a detailed enquiry into the matter and imposing of such a punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect is a major punishment and could not have been passed by the respondent without conducting a detailed enquiry into the same. I am in full agreement with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no detailed enquiry has been conducted before imposing major punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. However, instead of remitting the matter back for re-consideration, I deem it appropriate to give a quietus to this litigation. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, the impugned order is modified to the following effect. The petitioner shall be imposed with punishment of stoppage of three annual increments without cumulative effect and on restoration of the increments after completion of three years, the same shall be reckoned notionally till 31st December, 2007 and the petitioner is entitled for all monetary benefits with effect from 1st January, 2008. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. ________ 6-2-2008 rkk