IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 9806 of 2008 Between: S.A. Rahiaman S/o. S. Mehaboob Saeb E.No. 77272, R/o.D.No. 3-319, Nallagutta Street, Kadiri, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Anantapur Region, Anantapur. 2 The Divisional Manager, APSRTC, Hindupur Division, Hindupur Anantapur District. 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Kadiri Depot, Kadiri, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedingsNo. PA/675(148)/02 RM-A dt.13-4-2003 of the 1st respondent the proceedings No.PA/19(58)/2002-DVM.H dt. 29-6-2002 of the 2nd respondent and the proceedings No.01/118(2)01-KDR dt. 6-2-2002 of the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to add one annual increment to the pay of the petitioner in the intrerest of justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.D.GOWD Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.W.V.S.RAJESWARI The Court made the following : . THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.9806 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is directed against proceedings No. 01/118(2)01-KDR, dated 06-02-2002 passed by the third respondent as confirmed by the second and the first respondents. 2. Punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative eﬀect besides treating the suspension period ‘as not on duty’ for the purpose of leave, wages and increments, was imposed on the petitioner in the disciplinary proceedings concluded against him. The original authority passed an order on 06-02-2002 imposing such a punishment. Thereafter, the matter was carried in appeal and the appellate authority passed an order on 29-06-2002. Further, the matter was taken before the Reviewing Authority, which rejected the case of the petitioner on 13.4.2003. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. 3. There is no necessity of going into the details. The writ petition is ﬁled with an abnormal delay of more than ﬁve years. Thus, it suﬀers from irretrievable laches and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ C.V.RAMULU,J 08-09-2008 Stp .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}