IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13336 of 2008 Between: K. Sri Hari, S/o. Venkateswarlu, O/o. The Deputy Transport Commissioner & Secretary, Nellore, R/o. Narasaraopet, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Transport Commissioner, & Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Nellore, Nellore District. 2 The Transport Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Transport, R & B Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari (a) Call for the records related to and connected with the order passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A.No.4513 of 2007 dated 29-1-2008 and quash or set aside the same by declaring the action of the respondents in imposing major penalty of dimissal from service without conducting proper enquiry, without providing opportunity to the Petitioner and now allowing the petitioner to peruse the records as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also violative of CCA Rules and (b) Consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service with all consequential benefits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.13336 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Though the writ petition seems to have been filed against the common order dated 29-1-2008 passed in O.A.Nos.3922 and 4513 of 2007, learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant has confined his arguments to the impugned order in O.A.No.4513 of 2007. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Typist in the Office of the Assistant Director, District Survey and Land Record, Ongole, on compassionate grounds and subsequently transferred to Transport Department. While so, the petitioner was kept under suspension vide proceedings dated 17-8-2002 issued by Deputy Transport Commissioner, Nellore, on the allegation that he has committed misappropriation of tax DDs to the tune of Rs.20,67,045/- pertaining to stage and contract carriages. A regular departmental enquiry was conducted and the charges were framed against the petitioner and the Enquiry Officer submitted the report stating that the charges are proved. The main contention of the petitioner is that the enquiry was not conducted against the Superintendent and other higher officials, who were actually responsible for doing the work and the alleged misconduct. The authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service and the same was challenged in O.A.No.4513 of 2007 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions, disposed of O.A. directing the petitioner/applicant to file an appeal against the order of dismissal from service, before the authority concerned. 3. We have perused the impugned order and order of dismissal from service passed by the disciplinary authority. It is seen from the impugned order that the Tribunal has not gone into merits of O.A., but given liberty to the petitioner/applicant to avail the appeal remedy before the authority concerned. It appears that the petitioner without availing the alternative remedy of appeal, has directly approached the Tribunal. Without exhausting the appeal remedy available to the petitioner, he cannot rush to the Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. Further, the Tribunal has passed reasoned order directing the petitioner to avail the appeal remedy before the appellate authority under Rule 33 of A.P.C.S. (CC & A) Rules. In the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. However, we make it clear that the appellate authority shall examine and consider the appeal on its own merits, uninfluenced by any observations made herein, and dispose of the same, as per law. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 25-06-2008 bsc ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}