THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.6975 of 2000 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by the APSRTC National Mazdoor Union and APSRTC Employees Union through their representatives challenging the order of the Depot Manager – third respondent herein dated 28-11-1999 passed in Proceedings No.P2/781(02)/99-AMP ordering recovery of an amount of Rs.1,372/- each from the 76 workers, who are members of the petitioners’ union as the measure of punishment on the charges leveled against them. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager – second respondent herein, who by his order dated 31-03- 2000 passed in proceedings No.Steno/20/65/2000-RM-RJY disposed of the appeal confirming the order of recovery by modifying the quantum from Rs.1,372/- each from the 76 workers to Rs.1,203/- each from the 76 workers. 2. Though the said orders are questioned by raising several grounds, including the ground that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the provisions of the APSRTC Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1967, but however, in the very same regulations, particularly in Regulation 29, there is further remedy of review is provided before the Regional Manager against the order of the appellate authority. In such an event, there is no reason for the petitioners’ union to file this Writ Petition without availing the further remedy of review before the Regional Manager. In view of the grounds raised, it is desirable to direct the petitioners to pursue the remedy of review as provided under Regulation 29 of the Regulations. 3. For the aforesaid reasons, this Writ Petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioners to file review/revision before the appropriate authority, as contemplated under Regulation 29 of the Regulations within a period of one month from today. The impugned orders are stayed by this Court during the pendency of the Writ Petition. I further direct that impugned orders remain suspended till the disposal of the review/revision to be filed by the petitioners as indicated above. It is further ordered that if no review/revision is filed within the time indicated above, it is open for the respondents to give effect to the impugned orders. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. 18th March, 2009. skmr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6975 of 2000 Between: 1 APSRTC National Mazdoor Union (Regd. No.3108) rep. by its Depot Secretary, Amalapuram Depot. Sri K.Narasimhulu, S/o.K.Satyanaranyana, R/o.Amalapuram, East Godavari District. 2 APSRTC Employee Union (Regd. No.215) Rep. by its Depot Secretary, Amalapuram Depot, Sri Ch.V.V.S.Narayana, S/o.K.Satyanaranyana Murthy, R/o.Amalapuram, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mushirabad, Hyderabad-20. 2 A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Dy.Chief Traffic Manager, East Godavari Region, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. 3 A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Depot Manager, Amalapuram, E.G.District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 call for the records from 2nd and 3rd respondents and issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the proc.No.Steno/20/65/2000-RM-RJY, dated 31.3.2000 of 2nd respondent as illegal, unjust, contrary to law contrary to the Memorandum of Understanding, in violation of principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction; and without jurisdiction; and grant all consequential benefits; and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR PSRTC) The Court made the following :