THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No. 3107 of 2010 Between: Sadhanala Sai Pallam Raju …… Petitioner and The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Hyderabad & another ….. Respondent O R D E R: The petitioner is working as a driver with the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, with Employment No. E-353125. It appears that when he was driving the bus bearing Registration No. AP 10Z 3776, on 01.12.2009, at 08.50 a.m., from Nidadavole to Jangareddygudem, a passenger by name Sri Tadiparthi Venkata Ratnam, aged about 60 years, jumped out of the moving bus and fell down on the road in between the wheels, on account of which, he was crushed and died instantaneously. In that view of the matter, disciplinary proceedings have been initiated and a charge memo has been issued to the petitioner alleging that he was negligent enough in noticing the alighting passenger through rear view mirror while moving the bus from the point and thus, kept him under suspension pending enquiry, by an order dated 11.01.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent, which was served on him on 01.02.2010. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition questioning the charge memo, dated 11.01.2010 as well as the consequential order of suspension. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that when once it is admitted as per the charge memo that the passenger jumped on his own, the petitioner cannot be said to be at fault. It is further contended that as per the preliminary enquiry report of the Assistant Manager (Traffic), the said passenger is mainly responsible for the occurrence of the accident by alighting from the moving bus. In the said preliminary enquiry report, it is further stated that it is the duty of the conductor to ensure proper alighting of the passengers at the stages for which they have bought the tickets. From the above, it appears that the petitioner is not at fault and he cannot be expected to look from the rear view mirror. However, as the disciplinary authority is ceased of the matter and a preliminary enquiry report has already been submitted by the Assistant Manager (Traffic), the petitioner is hereby directed to offer his explanation within a period of ten days from today and the disciplinary authority is directed to complete the enquiry at the earliest, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such explanation, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. ----------------------------------- (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 15th February 2010 Note: Issue CC in three days. ksld