IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.15672 OF 2001 Between : The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Nidadavole Depot. ... PETITIONER AND Ch.Ramanuja Rao and another …RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.15672 OF 2001 ORDER: This writ petition is at the instance of APSRTC, Nidadavole Depot, questioning the award in I.D.No.232 of 1997, dated 16.09.2000, on the file of Labour Court, Guntur. 2. Respondent No.1 herein was the driver, who allegedly misconducted himself leading to drawing of two charges against him vide charge sheet, dated 20.12.1983. On the basis of the said charges, having been held proved, a punishment of stoppage of three Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect was imposed on him vide proceedings, dated 31.08.1985. On appeal, the appellate authority modified the punishment of stoppage of ‘’three Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect’’ to ‘’two Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect’’ vide proceedings, dated 16.01.1986. 3. The first respondent /employee questioned the proceedings, dated 16.01.1986 before the Industrial Tribunal in the aforesaid I.D.No.232 of 1997, which was allowed by the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that no enquiry was held by the petitioner-Corporation, and as such imposing of penalty is illegal. The said order, dated 16.09.2000, is questioned under the Certiorari Jurisdiction of this Court, in this writ petition. 4. Heard both the counsel. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Corporation submits that the findings of the Industrial Tribunal that no enquiry was held prior to imposition of the punishment, is factually incorrect and in fact, the enquiry was conducted and charges were held proved. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Corporation produced the records showing that a domestic enquiry was conducted, which culminated into report of the Enquiry Officer. The said report contains the statements of the witnesses recorded during the disciplinary enquiry and the evidence of the domestic enquiry was discussed by the Enquiry Officer. The disciplinary authority therefore, has taken into consideration the findings of the Enquiry Officer that the charges were held proved and on that basis, it has imposed the punishment of stoppage of three Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect. Later the appellate authority has modified the said punishment to stoppage of two Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect. 6. In view of the record produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to enquiry; the findings of the Industrial Tribunal that there was no enquiry preceding the imposition of the punishment appears to be factually incorrect. In the counter filed by the first respondent in this writ petition also shows that the said specific allegation of the petitioner-Corporation in paragraph No.3 of the affidavit, regarding enquiry conducted and according due and fair opportunity to the first respondent was not controverted by respondent No.1. The impugned award of the Industrial Tribunal therefore, cannot be sustained as it suffers from factual error. 7. It is however, to be seen that the matter relates to punishment imposed on the first respondent in 1985 and after a lapse of all these years, now it would be highly unjust and inequitable to remit the I.D. to the Industrial Tribunal for consideration afresh. 8. In the circumstances, therefore, the impugned award is set aside. However, the punishment imposed on the first respondent namely withholding of his two Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect is modified to ‘withholding of two Annual Grade Increments without cumulative effect’. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J JANUARY 27, 2011 YVL