IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3284 of 2006 Between: C.Parmeshwar S/o.Veerappa R/o.Plot No.57, RTC Colony, Sangareddy, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bus Depot, Sangareddy, Medak District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari, quash the impugned order of suspension from service as well as the charge sheet issued in proceedings No.P3/114(1)/2006-SRD dt.7.2.2006 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and in violation of Art.14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently grant all the consequential benefits in the interest of justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.NARASIMHA GOUD Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is working as Driver in the Sangareddy Depot of APSRTC. On 27.01.2006, he was driving a bus between Sangareddy and Bangalore. The bus was checked at Pothireddypally Cross Roads by the officials of the Excise Department. Three bottles of liquor were found in the bus. Alleging that the petitioner is guilty of possessing and transporting the liquor bottles, in contravention of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, a complaint was submitted before the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy. Similarly, the departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. A charge sheet, dated 07.02.2006, was issued, and on the same day, the petitioner was placed under suspension, through a separate order. The petitioner challenges both of them. Heard Sri V.Narasimha Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt.B.G.Uma Devi, learned standing counsel for the respondents. So far as the suspension ordered, against the petitioner, is concerned, while admitting the Writ Petition, this Court granted interim order on 23.02.2006. On that basis, the petitioner is continuing in service. The petitioner contends that he is required to take the same stand, be it before the concerned criminal Court, or in the departmental proceedings and unless and until, the criminal case is concluded, the departmental proceedings cannot be proceeded with. The allegation that the petitioner was found in possession of certain liquor bottles, gave rise to criminal case, on the one hand, and the departmental proceedings, on the other. Though there is qualitative difference in the charges, the fact remains that the petitioner has to divulge his defence, in one form, or the other. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, a) setting aside the order of suspension, dated 07.02.2006, and b) directing that the disciplinary proceedings, against the petitioner, shall be deferred, till the disposal of the criminal case, instituted against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:02.07.2008 GJ