IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 631 of 2009 Between: B.S. Kumar S/o. B. Anand Rao R/o. 1-12-24/39, Indira Colony, Medak. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Represented by its Regional Manager,Medak Region. 2 Depot Manager Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Medak, Medak Dist. .....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 an order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the proceedings No. 02/62(61)/91-MDK. dated 31-3-1992 as illegal and arbitrary; and consequently direct the respondents to set aside the same and release all the consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 631 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed by B.S. Kumar assailing the proceedings No.02/62(61)91-MDK, dated 31-3-1992 issued by the Depot Manager, APSRTC, Medak District-2nd Respondent. 2. The petitioner was appointed as casual Conductor in the year 1983. His services were regularized on 1-6-1984 and posted to Sanga Reddy Depot. On 17-10-1991 a check was conducted while the petitioner was conducting the bus and certain irregularities with regard to issuance of tickets were noticed. A charge Memo was issued. The petitioner submitted explanation to the charge memo. Enquiry Officer was appointed. The Enquiry Officer conducted enquiry and submitted the report finding the petitioner guilty of the charges. The Disciplinary Authority-2nd Respondent accepted the findings and issued show cause notice proposing the punishment of reduction of pay by two incremental stages with cumulative effect. The petitioner submitted explanation to the show cause notice. The Disciplinary Authority has considered the explanation and issued proceedings dated 31-3-1992 confirming the punishment of stoppage of two incremental stages with cumulative effect and also treating the suspension period as ‘not on duty’. Assailing the said proceeding, the petitioner filed this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission, Smt. B.G. Umadevi, learned standing counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the punishment came to be imposed on the petitioner without conducting a proper enquiry and therefore, the proceedings impugned in the writ petition are liable to set aside. 7. I have gone through the enquiry report. The material placed on record before the Enquiry Officer have been considered in detail. The Enquiry Officer, on full fledged enquiry found the petitioner guilty of all the three charges. There is no irregularity or illegality in the report submitted by the Enquiry Officer. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the report submitted by the Enquiry Officer is without conducting any enquiry has no substance. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 22nd January, 2009. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 631 OF 2009 22ND JANUARY, 2009.