THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.20143 of 2011 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent-Depot Manager, Nandyal Bus Depot, Kurnool District in issuing proceedings No.M1/118(1)/2011-NDL, dated 17.05.2011, suspending the petitioner from service pending enquiry, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to set aside the same. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: According to the petitioner, he was appointed as driver in Nandyal Bus Depot and working as such since 24 years. While so, on 01.05.2011, he attended duties at 19.00 hours in Nandyal to Chennai Service and at about 18.00 hours, he reported for duties before the security office at garrage. After taking their permission, when he entered the premises of the gurrage and ready to clean the glasses of the bus, the security guard informed him that the respondent Depot Manager called him. When he approached the Depot Manager, he asked the Security Head Guard to exercise a check with alcoholic breath analyser. When the security head guard exercised check with breath analyser, it did not give any sound. But, the Depot Manager told the petitioner that he consumed alcohol and referred him to the Government General Hospital, Nandyal for thorough check up. The doctor of the Government General Hospital checked him and informed that he was not in intoxication condition and that he has not consumed any alcohol and to that extent he gave a certificate. Since the respondent Depot Manager was having grudge against him, he again tested him with alcohol breath analyser, which belongs to Allagadda Bus Depot, at about 22.00 hours and told that he had taken alcohol and threatened to suspend him from service. Due to the sudden utterance of suspension, he fell down at the garrage itself. On 09.05.2011 he attended the duties along with sick and fitness certificate before the Traffice Supervisor, who directed him to report before the respondent Depot Manager. But, on 17.05.2011, the respondent Depot Manager suspended him from service and issued a charge sheet, for which he submitted his explanation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even though the petitioner was not under the influence of alcohol, the respondent Depot Manager passed the impugned order suspending him from service and therefore the same is liable to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for A.P.S.R.T.C contended that there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order of suspension. 5. There cannot be any dispute that it is the disciplinary authority, which can place an employee under suspension when there is misconduct on his part. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 01.05.2011 when the Security Head Guard exercised the check with alcohol breath analyser, the petitioner was found to have consumed alcohol. But, the doctor, who examined the petitioner on the said date at the time of admission found that he was not under the influence of alcohol. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner was working as a driver of Nandyal Bus Depot. He has to drive the vehicle from Nandyal to Chennai at 19.00 hours on 01.05.2011. When the Security Head Guard checked him with a breath analyser, he was found to have consumed alcohol. There is serious lapse on the part of the petitioner, who has to take care of the lives of the passengers, but having consumed alcohol, he reported for duty. No doubt, the doctor, who examined the petitioner at the time of admission, found that he was not under the influence of alcohol. But due to paucity of time, he may not be under the influence of alcohol. The doctor has not ruled out the possibility of the petitioner consuming alcohol in his report. Even otherwise, it is a question of fact to be determined during the course of enquiry. Hence, on that ground the suspension order cannot be revoked. 7. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the Enquiry Officer shall complete the enquiry, uninfluenced by any of the observations made by this Court, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate the same to the disciplinary authority. There shall be no order as to costs. K.C. BHANU, J Date: 19.07.2011 va