IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 12924 of 2004 Between: Sri. N.V. Sivaiah (Ex.Casual Driver), S/o. Rama Subbaiah, R/o. Door No. 51/23, Kothapet Panchayati, Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The A.P.S.R.T.C. rep by its Chairman and Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The A.P.S.R.T.C. rep by its Regional Manager Kadapa Region. …RESPONDENTS For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent by deleting the petitioner’s name from the approved list / selection by its proceedings No.01/2/(12)/2002-RCTY, dated 3-12-2003 without framing any and issuing charge sheet and no enquiry is wholly illegal arbitrary and unjust and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into his service as casual driver with full wages and with all other attendant benefits and pass such further or other Order or Orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner :M/s B.Malleswari Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.P.Vinayaka Swamy, SC for APSRTC The Court at the admission stage made the following Order : THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO. 12924 OF 2004 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as a causal driver in Rayachoti Depot by order dated 19-03-1999. While he was discharging his services as casual driver, the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 19-09-2002 proposing to terminate his services on the ground that he caused the accident of the bus and was tried for the offences under Sections 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC. The petitioner submits that the Court acquitted him and despite his acquittal, he was terminated from service by termination order dated 03-12-2002. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached this Court seeking a direction to set aside the termination order dated 03-12-2002. The petitioner contends that the 2nd respondent failed to issue charge sheet or frame any charges or conduct any departmental enquiry before issuing the show cause notice of terminating the petitioner from service, and since he completed 240 days as casual labour, the respondents are expected to conduct regular enquiry, and without conducting any enquiry, termination order dated 03-12-2002 was issued and hence, the same is liable to be set aside. Heard both the Counsel. The respondents could not place any material as to whether any enquiry was conducted against the petitioner before issuing the order of termination from service. Therefore, termination order passed by the 2nd respondent is liable to be set aside. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the order of termination dated 03-12-2002. However, the respondents are at liberty to conduct enquiry as per rules and pass appropriate orders after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner. No costs. 27-04-2004 usd To 1. The Chairman and Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C. Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Kadapa Region. 3 2 CD copies.