IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 20554 of 1999 BETWEEN: D. Karampuraiah S/o. Pichaiah, R/o. 18-1-293 H, Bhavani Nagar, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Parisrama Bhavan, Fateh Maidan Road, Hyderabad -500 004. (Govt. of A.P. undertaking) 2 Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., (Undertaking of A.P.) Rep. by its Board of Directors, Parisrama Bhavan, 6th Floor, 5-9-58/B, Fateh Maidan Road, Hyderabad -04. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in imposing punishment of recovery an amount of Rs.1,654.75/- (Rupees one thousand six hundred fifty four and paise seventy five only) from the salary of the petitioner vide proceedings No. 19895/PW/APIIC/E1/97, dated 16-8-99 pending disposal of the appeal dated 15-9-99 by the 1st Respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to permit the petitioner to Peruse the relevant records at Kurnool and pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.M.NAIDU Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.V.SIMHADRI The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in imposing penalty of recover of amount of Rs.1,654.75 ps. form the petitioner’s salary vide proceedings dated 16.08.1999 as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending appeal filed against the impugned order dated 16.08.1999, the respondents were seeking recovery of amount of Rs.1,654.75 ps. towards penalty. Pending the writ petition, this Court granted interim order staying recovery. Since the legality or otherwise of recovery of the above mentioned amount is the subject matter of the appeal, I feel it appropriate to direct respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner after giving him an opportunity of personal hearing. As the recovery of amount is stayed by this Court pending the writ petition, I direct that the stay shall be continued till the disposal of the appeal by respondent No.1. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, without going into merits of the case, with the direction to respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and pending appeal, the recovery of amount is stayed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J December 23, 2008 DSK