IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.8723 OF 2011 Date:18-04-2011 Between:- M.Vijaya Laxmi .. Petitioner And A.P.S.R.T.C., rep.by its Managing Director, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the order of termination of service issued in Proceedings No.02/95/(48)/2009-UPL, dated 24.07.2009, and the order of respondent No.2 issued in Proceedings No.ST/19(112)/2009-DVM- HD, dated 14.08.2009, as confirmed by respondent No.4 in his proceedings No.PA/20(259)/2010-HR, dated 16.02.2011, in so far as denying the continuity of service and other consequential benefits to the petitioner as arbitrary and illegal, and to direct the respondents to treat her as fresh Conductor with continuity of service along with all consequential benefits including regularization of service on par with her colleagues and back wages. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she joined as Conductor in respondent Corporation on 11.11.2008 on contract basis and was placed under the control of respondent No.3. Later, she was terminated from service on the ground of involvement in cash and ticket irregularities. She was reinstated into service on the order passed by respondent No.2. She filed W.P.No.27655 of 2010 for continuity of service and other consequential benefits, which was disposed of with a direction to avail the remedy of Revision. She preferred a Revision to respondent No.4 but it was rejected. A charge sheet was issued alleging the charge as under: “For having already collected the sum of Rs.2.00 at boarding point itself from the passenger found alighting without ticket at Ghatkesar stage No.13, who boarded your bus at NFC ex-stage No.14, which constitutes mis- conduct in terms of Circular No.PD-05/2009, dt.23.02.09 under Annexure-I of serial no of 6.” Though she submitted her explanation, an enquiry was conducted. Respondent No.3 issued show cause notice. Not satisfied with the explanation, respondent No.3 passed the final order, dated 24.07.2009, imposing the punishment of removal from service. She preferred an appeal to respondent No.2, who in turn, re- engaged as fresh Conductor on contract basis. She was denied the benefits of past service from 11.11.2008 to 24.07.2009. When she requested respondent No.3 for regularization of her service but in vain. She preferred a revision, dated 16.11.2010, before respondent No.4, who in turn passed the impugned order. 3. Heard both sides. 4. It is the disciplinary authority and on appeal, the appellate authority, being fact finding authorities, have exclusive power to consider the evidence to maintain discipline. They are invested with the discretion to impose appropriate punishment. The punishment to be imposed must be commensurate with the gravity of misconduct. In other words, the punishment is totally disproportionate to the proved misconduct of an employee. The plea of petitioner is that though she issued one ticket to one lady passenger, she has misplaced it and the same was found on the body of the bus. The explanation given by the petitioner is found to be acceptable to the appellate authority. Furthermore, this is a first case of cash and ticket irregularity allegedly committed by the petitioner. So, the appellate authority ought to have ordered for continuity of service. Denying the continuity of service to the petitioner is unduly harsh in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Hence, the impugned order of termination of service issued in Proceedings No.02/95/(48)/2009-UPL, dated 24.07.2009, and the order of respondent No.2 issued in Proceedings No.ST/19(112)/2009- DVM-HD, dated 14.08.2009, as confirmed by respondent No.4 in his proceedings No.PA/20(259)/2010-HR, dated 16.02.2011, is modified giving the benefit of only continuity of service from the date of termination till the date of re-engagement to the petitioner. It is needless to observe that the petitioner is not entitled to any monetary or other benefits in pursuance of this order. 6. With the above modification, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 18th April, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.8723 OF 2011 Date:18-04-2011 AMD