THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.26533 OF 2009 Dated: 05.12.2009 Between: M. Madhu Gopal … Petitioner And 1. APSRTC, rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and 3 others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.26533 OF 2009 ORDER : The petitioner’s services as a Contract Driver in the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), were terminated by order dated 27.2.2009 passed by the 4t h respondent on the ground of alleged cash and ticket irregularities. Though the petitioner preferred an Appeal against the said order, the same was dismissed by the 3rd respondent by order dated 23.4.2009 and even his Revision Petition was dismissed by the 2nd respondent by order dated 16.11.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation. While placing reliance upon the decision of this Court in W.P.No.5998 of 2009, dated 23.3.2009, the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned order of termination without holding any enquiry into the alleged irregularities is arbitrary and illegal. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the Circular dated 23.2.2009 issued by the Corporation wherein the procedure to be followed while initiating disciplinary action against the employees engaged on contract basis has been specified. The fact that no enquiry was held before passing the impugned order of termination could not be disputed by the learned Counsel for the Corporation. The Circular dated 23.2.2009 specifically provides that even in the case of employees engaged on contract basis a detailed enquiry has to be conducted before taking any disciplinary action. In the circumstances, the impugned order of termination which was admittedly passed without conducting any enquiry cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order of termination dated 27.2.2009 as confirmed in Appeal and Revision by orders dated 23.4.2009 and 16.11.2009 respectively are hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to reinstate the petitioner into service. However, the respondents are at liberty to hold the enquiry following due process of law into the alleged irregularities. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 05.12.2009 gbs