THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.27230 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is employed as Conductor in the Eleswaram Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. A charge memo was issued on 09.09.2011, pointing out certain irregularities, referable to a check caused on 04.09.2011. On the same day, the petitioner was placed under suspension, by a separate order. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension. Heard Sri E.Madan Mohan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri K.Satyanarayana Murthy, learned standing counsel for the respondents. The allegation against the petitioner is that he issued four un-punched tickets to the passengers, who boarded the bus at Puligogulapadu, by collecting a sum of Rs.7/- from each. It was also alleged that, to another batch of four passengers, the petitioner issued tickets that were punched for Stage No.15, instead of Stage No.17. Normally, this Court would not interfere with the orders of suspension, when allegations of corruption or failure to issue tickets even after collecting fare, are made. In the instant case, the allegation against the petitioner is not that he has collected fare and failed to issue tickets. Even according to the impugned order, the petitioner did issue tickets, but in one case, the tickets were not punched and in another case, he punched all tickets. The petitioner states that all the tickets issued by him were entered in the star document, and the failure to punch or defective punching is, on account of heavy rush in the bus. The question as to whether there was any serious defect on the part of the petitioner, needs to be gone into in the disciplinary proceedings. However, the allegations against the petitioner do not warrant, suspension pending enquiry. In fact, the Corporation would be at loss on account of suspension, since it would have to pay the substantial part of the salary without extracting work. The concerned material has already been seized from the petitioner and there is no likelihood of evidence. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:12.10.2011 GJ