IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11092 of 2008 Between: R. Kotaji S/o Late Venkat Narsaiah E. No. 251084, of APSRTC Tandur Depot, Ranga Reddy District, R/o H. No. 1-1-525/C, Srisrinagar, Suryapet, Near Hi-Tech Station, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Director (V&S), Hyderabad Zone, MGBS, Hyderabad 2 the Director (V&S). Greater Hyderabad Zone, MGBS, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the issuing of suspension order No. P1/114(16)/08 AD (V&S) HZ dated 12- 05-2008 along with charge sheet with same number and date on the letter of 2nd respondent that a complaint lodged by the Depot workers of Tandur Depot against the petitioner without obtaining report from the DM/Tandur and MF/Tandur on the complaint which was sent direct by the Depot workers to the Director of Vigilance without intimating to the Depot Manager and M.F. Whereas the petitioner had obtained night shift position from the night incharge i.e, Chargeman at 03-00 hours thereafter he put eye drops in his eyes due to eye infection's he was in trouble and eye pain and the eye specialist Doctor had Checked up his eyes on 26-04-2008 and prescribed medicine and eye drops with instructions to take complete rest but due to not granting of leave he attended to duty for patrolling after performing duties along with the co- Worker security Guard at Depot Gate and the Complaint from the Depot Staff is a counter blast to the reports submitted against the workers for their late reporting to duties to the Depot Manager on directions of 1st respondent, is as illegal, unjust contrary to law violation of principles of natural justice by setting a side the suspension order and granting all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MOHD.GHOUSEUDDIN Counsel for the Respondents: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is employed as Security Guard in the Tandur depot of APSRTC. On 26.04.2008, he was drawn for the patrolling duty between 0.00 to 08.00 hours. On a complaint received from the staff of the depot that the petitioner was found sleeping on a table in the office of Assistant Mechanical Foreman, the first respondent caused preliminary enquiry and placed the petitioner under suspension vide orders, dated 12.05.2008. On the same day, a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner with the said allegation. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was found sleeping between 03.00 to 06.00 hours. The petitioner states that some of the employees whose late coming was marked by him had a grievance against him and made a false complaint. It is also stated that the petitioner received treatment for his eyes on 25.04.2008 itself and with a view to avoid infection to them, he rested for some time in the room. Though that act of relaxing is dereliction of duty, it cannot be treated as such a serious matter warranting suspension. The petitioner is already facing disciplinary proceedings. It was not alleged that any untoward incident has taken place on account of lapses on the part of the petitioner. The charge is not so serious as to warrant suspension pending enquiry, particularly when it is not even alleged that the petitioner would tamper with any evidence, in the enquiry. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the order of suspension, dated 12.05.2008, is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:17.06.2008 GJ