IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8955 of 2008 Between: Sk.Babji S/o.Moula Saheb, ADC R/o.1st lane Main Road Naidupet, Guntur.Guntur Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C Rep.by its Regional Manager A.P.S.R.T.C Guntur Region Guntur Dist 2 The A.P.S.R.T.C Rep.by its Depot Manager A.P.S.R.T.C Macheral Bus Depot Guntur 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 or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the proceedings No.O1/114(1)/1996-MCL, dt.16-09-1997 is illegal,arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the proceedings No.01/144(1)/1996-MCL, dt.16-09-1997 isseud increments to the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.VEERASEKHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: C.PRAKASH REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8955 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Driver in the Macherla Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, by issuing a charge sheet, dated 03.04.1996. Departmental enquiry was conducted and in the report, dated 19.07.1997, the charges leveled against the petitioner were held proved. Based on the same, the 2nd respondent passed an order, dated 16.09.1997, imposing the penalty of postponement of annual increments for a period of two years with cumulative effect. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Divisional Manager was rejected on 30.09.2007. Thereupon, the petitioner filed a review before the 1st respondent on 07.01.2008. The petitioner complains that the review has not been disposed of, so far. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The appellate authority took almost ten years for the disposal of the appeal. Soon thereafter, the petitioner availed the remedy of review. Though just three months have elapsed, having regard to the fact that the original order is of the year 1997, the 1st respondent can be required to expedite the matter. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the review filed by the petitioner, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 24.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8955 of 2008 Date: 24.04.2008 JSU