IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.1993 of 2009 Between: P.N.Chowdary. … Petitioner And The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Narayanpet Depot, Mahabubnagar District and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri V.Ramchander Goud. Counsel for the respondents: Sri V.Padmanabha Rao for Smt.B.G.Uma Devi. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside proceedings No.02/95(53)/2008-NRPT dated 29-1-2009, whereby respondent No.1 removed the petitioner from service as conductor. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to explain as to how this Writ Petition is maintainable when statutory appeal is provided against the impugned order to the designated appellate authority under Regulation 22 of the Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1967 (for short “the Regulations”). Sri V.Ramchander Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that para 35 of Circular No.04/2008- OPD(HES), dated 8-2-2008 provided that the guidelines issued on disposal of appeals by the appellate authorities will be reiterated separately, and that, so far, the guidelines were not reiterated and the appellate authority is not constituted. I find this contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner as wholly untenable because I do not find anything from the circular referred to above to conclude that the appellate authority is required to be constituted afresh. Regulation 22 of the Regulations reads as under: “22.Matters in respect of which and to whom appeals lie: 1) An employee shall be entitled to appeal, as hereinafter provided and not otherwise, from an original order passed by an authority. (a) imposing on him any other penalties specified in regulation 8; or (b) denying or varying to his disadvantage his pay, allowances, provident fund and gratuity benefits or other conditions of service as regulated by any regulation or by agreement; or (c) interpreting to his disadvantage the provisions of any regulations or agreement as aforesaid. 2) An employee may appeal against an order referred to in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) to the authority next above that which passed the original order. 3) An employee may appeal against an order referred to in sub-clause (b) and (c) of clause (1) to the Corporation or to such other authority as may be specified in this behalf by a resolution of the Corporation. 4) Notwithstanding anything contained in this regulation, no appeal shall lie against any order passed by the Corporation. Explanation: In this regulation the expression ‘employee’ includes a person who has ceased to be an employee.” It is not the case of the petitioner that the above- reproduced regulation has been, in any way, amended, modified or deleted. The Circular on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is purely administrative in nature, will, at the most, be of guidance to the personnel dealing with various aspects, including the procedure to be followed in the conduct of domestic enquiry, imposing of punishment, disposal of appeals etc. Even Clause-35 mentions that guidelines issued on disposal of appeals by the appellate authorities will be reiterated separately. This itself presupposes that already certain guidelines are there for disposal of the appeals. When there is already a regulation in place providing for an appeal and the appellate authority is constituted and functioning, the appellate authority is bound to dispose of the appeal by following the established procedure. The law is well settled that though alternative remedy is not an absolute bar for maintaining the writ petition, still the superior Courts evolved the doctrine of alternative remedy only to see that the persons do not rush to the constitutional Courts without first exhausting the alternative remedies. Only in cases where the orders passed are without jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice, this Court entertains Writ Petitions without insisting on the petitioner to avail the alternative remedies. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that his case falls in either of these exceptions nor the remedy of appeal provided under the Regulations is not efficacious. Therefore, I do not find any reason to entertain this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned appellate authority. If the petitioner files such an appeal within a period three weeks from today before the appellate authority, he shall entertain and dispose of the same on merits. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:07-04-2009 MNR