THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.24669 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is working as Driver in the Miryalaguda Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. Himself and another by name, Shafiuddin were assigned the duty of operating a service between Miryalaguda and Bangalore, on 14-08-2011. The service is without any conductor. Both the drivers are to operate the Bus by performing the duties of driver and conductor, depending upon their convenience. The Bus was checked enroute. It was found that the fare of Rs.464/- was collected from two passengers, who boarded at Ananthapur, bound for Bangalore, but tickets were not issued. A charge-sheet was issued on 22-08-2011, and through an order of the same day, the respondent placed the petitioner under suspension. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. The petitioner contends that the irregularity if at all, had occurred, when the other driver issued the tickets, and that the petitioner cannot be held liable for the same. It is also stated that Shafiuddin had given a statement, disclosing his lapse. The arrangement in operating the service is such that, both the drivers must discharge the functions of driving the Bus and issuing the tickets on routine basis, depending on their convenience. The check revealed that an irregularity, viz., collection of fare of Rs.464/- from two passengers and non-issuance of tickets, has taken place. The question, as to who among the drivers are responsible, and what is the role played by the other; needs to be considered in the departmental enquiry. This Court cannot express any view at this stage, and it is not inclined to interfere with the order of suspension. However, the respondent can be required to expedite the departmental enquiry. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, upholding the order of suspension, but directing the respondent to conclude the on-going enquiry, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It shall be open to the petitioner to rely upon such material, as he intends to, in the enquiry. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.14-09-2011. KO