THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.NO.24415 OF 2005 Dated 28-11-2005 Between: N.Balaiah Ranga Reddy District. …Petitioner AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Tandur Bus Depot, Ranga Reddy District. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.NO.24415 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Conductor in Tandur Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. When he was conducting the Bus, on 04-10-2005, a check was caused at stage No.31, Chincholi. A charge memo was issued alleging that the petitioner issued tickets of Rs.50/- denominations to three passengers, but did not account for the same in the S.R. The second allegation was that the petitioner collected a sum of Rs.116/- from a passenger and issued un-punched tickets of denominations, of Rs.100/-, 10/- and 6/-. It was also alleged that the tickets were not accounted for. Thereafter, a charge-sheet was issued on 17-10-2005 and the petitioner was required to submit his explanation. On the same day, the respondent passed another order, placing the petitioner under suspension. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the basis for the action initiated against the petitioner is improper scrutiny of the S.R., and that a close examination of the matter would reveal that no irregularity has taken place. He contends that when the petitioner has collected the fair and issued tickets, there was no basis for the respondent to place the petitioner under suspension. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that it is too early to arrive at a conclusion, as to the truth or otherwise of the allegation, and that the petitioner has to wait till the conclusion of the enquiry. The petitioner was placed under suspension, pending enquiry into certain charges. The allegation against the petitioner is that though he issued tickets to the passengers in the Bus, the tickets were not accounted for. The question, as to whether the allegations are well-founded or not, can be considered only in the departmental enquiry. Having regard to the contents of the impugned order, it cannot be said that there was absolutely no basis for the respondent in placing the petitioner under suspension. Instead of directing reinstatement of the petitioner, at this stage, the respondent can be required to expedite the enquiry. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent to conclude the enquiry initiated against the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.28-11-2005 KO