IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25616 of 2007 Between: Sk. M. Pasha S/o. Ahamad Ali, Driver, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 APSRTC, Rep. by its VC & MD, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Huzurabad Depot, Huzurabad, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ order or directions more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the charge sheet No. 01/227(33)/2007-HZB dt. 8-11- 2007 passed by the 2nd respondent herein in framing the alleged charge against the petitioner as illegal, and arbitrary and set aside the same and further direct the respondents herein to drop the charge framed against the petitioner with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.GOVINDA RAJULU Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.P.RAJANI REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25616 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Driver in Huzurabad Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. On 07.11.2007, he was entrusted with the duty of driving a bus bearing No.AP 10 Z 3459, on the route from Vavilala to Kundanapally. After completing the trip, he brought the bus to the HSD Oil Bunk. There, the Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) and the Depot Manger were counseling the drivers, at that time. On suspecting that the petitioner was in drunken condition, breath analysis test was conducted on him. It was found that the petitioner was intoxicated. Therefore, on the next day, vide separate proceedings, a charge sheet was issued and an order of suspension pending enquiry was passed. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension, dated 08.11.2007. The petitioner states that when he was waiting outside the depot, after completion of duty, he was called in and the test was conducted. He contends that the charge leveled against him is not true. The respondents filed a counter affidavit. It is stated that the test was conducted, when the petitioner was very much on the driving seat of the bus and the defence taken by the petitioner need to be considered in the domestic enquiry. It is urged that it is not at all safe to permit the petitioner to discharge the duties and the safety of the passengers would be in jeopardy. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondents. The charge clearly discloses that the petitioner was found in drunken condition, when he was very much in the driving seat of the bus. It may be true that the trip and duty was completed by the petitioner. All the same, the driver is not supposed to be in drunken condition, while on duty. The defence taken by the petitioner would be considered in the domestic enquiry. Suspension of the impugned order would enable the petitioner to continue in duty and it is not at all safe to permit the passenger busses to be driven by the persons, who are habituated to drinking The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, it is directed that the respondents shall conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner, within two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. None of the observations made herein shall be treated as finding about the conduct of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 01.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25616 of 2007 Date: 01.04.2008 JSU