IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.25557 OF 2000 DATED:25.11.2010 Between: Sri Jampana Atchuta Rama Raju … Petitioner And The Regional Manager A.P.S.R.TC., Vizianagaram and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.25557 OF 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the first respondent in passing the proceedings No.Peshi/20(25)/98-RM: VZM, dt.31.8.1998, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently to direct the respondents to pay all the consequential benefits, including back wages, to the petitioner during the period from the date of his suspension till the date of reinstatement. It appears, the petitioner while working as driver, involved in a fatal accident on 28.2.1995 at Nehru Park, Vizianagaram, when he was driving bus bearing No.AAZ 7049 on the route Palavalasa to Vizianagaram. After conducting a detailed enquiry, the petitioner was removed from service on 11.7.1995. Aggrieved thereby, he carried the matter in appeal before the Divisional Manager. However, the said appeal was dismissed. Thereafter, since in the criminal case the petitioner was acquitted, the petitioner filed a review petition before the Regional Manager, Vizianagaram. The said Regional Manager disposed of the review petition by order dt.31.8.1998 directing reinstatement of the petitioner, while imposing punishment of reduction in pay scale to that of minimum of the pay scale for a period of three years. Further, the period of absence to duty from the date of suspension till he reports for duty was treated as ‘not on duty’ for the purpose of leave and increments. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. There is no necessity of going into all the details. The impugned order passed by the Regional Manager reads as under: “I have gone through the review petition with reference to the material on record and also the judgment of the Addl. Judicial Magistrate of the Ist Class, Vizianagaram produced by the petitioner. The petitioner was removed at the end of the disciplinary proceedings in which the following charges were framed against him. 1) “For having driven the vehicle No.AAZ 7049 in a negligent manner without taking proper precautionary measures and without anticipation while passing through town limits and caused a fatal accident which took place when the vehicle collided with a scooter AP35- 3389 at Nehru Park in Vizianagaram town at about 16.40 hrs. on 28.2.95 while you were operating the vehicle from Palavalsa to Vizianagaram as a result of which Sri K. Pydiviswanadham, rider of the scooter died on the spot and Sri P. Sesharao, one of the two pillion riders of the scooter died with multiple injuries on the very day while the second pillion rider Sri. K. Sanyasi Raju was injured critically and has been unconscious which comes under misconduct vide Reg. No.28 (ix.a&b) and (xxxi) of APSRTC Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1963.” 2) “For having damaged the vehicle bearing No.AAZ 7049 on 28.2.95 and also the scooter when the vehicle was driven by you on the above said route.” It is found that the Hon’ble Court of Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vizianagaram held that rash and negligent driving on the part of the petitioner are not established and hence acquitted the party honourably. In the light of the judgment and upon perusal of the material on record, it is seen that the preliminary enquiry holds both the scooterist and the petitioner responsible for the accident. It is also seen that as many as three persons were driving on scooter involving in accident. Hence, the contribution of the scooterist is also there to some extent. It is also seen that he was in receipt of ‘Safety Driving Allowance’ also for some time. In view of his earlier clean record of service in the corporation, I am inclined to afford an opportunity to the petitioner by reducing the penalty. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that Sri J.A.R. Raju, E.454320, Ex-driver of Vizianagaram depot be reinstated into service as Driver and posted to PARVATHIPURAM depot. As a measure of punishment, his pay be reduced to that of minimum of the pay scale for a period of 3 (THREE) years which shall have the effect on his future increments. The period of absence from the date of suspension till he reports for duty be treated as NOT ON DUTY for the purpose of leave and increments. He should pay the Security Deposit afresh at the Office of the Accounts Officer, VZM, and produce the M.R. to DM/PPM before reporting for duty. The DM/PPM shall take him for duty first and then direct for medical for A1 category. The review petition is allowed to the extent ordered above.” From the above, it is clear that the petitioner was initially removed from service on 11.7.1995 and the appeal filed by him also failed. Even the review petition filed by him earlier, failed. However, since the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case, the present review was filed and the same was entertained and the above order was passed. Since, earlier the petitioner had clean record of service and only to afford an opportunity to him to serve the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, a lenient view was taken and he was reinstated into service. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the Regional Manager, Vizianagaram, while passing the impugned order has not committed any error calling for interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________________ (C.V. RAMULU, J) 25.11.2010 bnr