THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 27770 OF 2007 O R D E R: The petitioner is a Conductor in Tuni Depot of APSRTC. On 15.11.2007, he was conducting a service from Tuni to Rajahmundry. A check was affected at stage 23. It was alleged that though the petitioner had collected Rs.200/-, from a batch of four adult and two child passengers, he retained fare for four adult and one child passengers, and did not collect fare and issue ticket, to a child passenger. A charge sheet was issued with the above allegations on 11.12.2007, and through a separate order of the same day, the petitioner was placed under suspension. The same is challenged in this writ petition. It is stated that though the petitioner was in possession of sufficient amount tendered by the batch of passengers, he did not retain the fare and issue ticket to a child passenger, on being informed that his age is less than 5 years, and that the suspension of the petitioner is unwarranted. The respondents filed a counter affidavit, stating that the petitioner was inflicted with punishment, on earlier occasion, and it is a fresh act of misconduct. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This is not a case, where the petitioner has collected fare from a passenger and refused to issue ticket. The strange part of it is that the batch of passengers tendered Rs.200/- and the petitioner had, in fact, returned a sum of Rs.56/-, by issuing four full tickets and one half ticket. He went by the representation of the passengers, as regards the age of another child, and on his own assessment, he felt that he is only a child, not under the necessity of purchasing a ticket. Even this, no doubt, is debatable in the departmental enquiry. It cannot be said that there was any malafide intention, on the part of the petitioner, warranting immediate suspension from service. Further, while admitting the writ petition, this court passed an order dated 27.12.2007, on the basis of which, he is continuing on duty. This court is of the view that the respondents can conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a reasonable time. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, and the impugned order is set aside. The respondents are directed to conclude the enquiry, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 15th July 2007 PAN