IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 14943 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Moinuddin Khan S/o. Late Noor Mohd. Khan Falaknuma Depot, Hyderabad, A.P. R/o. H.No.17-9-322/6, Waheed Colony, Yakutpura, Hyderabad-A.P. ..... PETITIONER AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC Falaknuma Depot, Hyderabad, A.P. .....RESPONDENT 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, order or direction preferably in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent to recover the Rs.35,589-50 (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Nine and Fifty Paise Only) from the settlement amount of the petitioner on his retirement on 29.02.2008 from service towards the value of missing tickets from the non-movable / idle trays vide office order No. AM(P)/329(1)/07F.M dated 05.06.2008 is against the APSRTC conduct regulation 1963 - Regulation 28(IX)(a) and is as illegal, unjust contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and directing the respondent to return the recovered amount. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.MOHD.GHOUSEUDDIN Counsel for the Respondents: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner retired from the A.P.S.R.T.C. as Deputy Superintendent, on 29.02.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. Few months before that, he was issued a charge sheet, dated 14.09.2007, alleging that tickets worth Rs.63,991/- were not accounted for and that Rs.2,180/- remained due towards special hire charges. The third charge was that JET tickets worth Rs.97,500/- were not destroyed with the sanction of the competent authority. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 01.11.2007. Departmental Enquiry was conducted and the respondent herein passed an order, dated 05.06.2008, holding that the petitioner is liable to pay a sum of Rs.35,589/-. This amount was deducted from the retirement benefits of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated on the basis of three allegations. The first is that the petitioner did not account for tickets worth Rs.63,991/- and during the enquiry, it emerged that tickets worth Rs.30,581/- are available in various Police Stations in the related cases. The petitioner was held liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.33,409/-. The second charge is about the recovery of special hire charges of Rs.7,580/-. On this, it was held that a sum of Rs.5,400/- is to be recovered from an employee, by name Sri G.Narsimha, and the petitioner was held liable to refund a sum of Rs.2,180/-. The third allegation is about non-destruction of tickets worth Rs.97,500/-. The tickets were physically available and the petitioner was not held liable for any amount. In the first charge, it was not even an allegation against the petitioner that he has utilized the missing tickets. I n Ch.P.REDDY v APSRTC, HYDERABAD, this Court held that in the matters of this nature, the Corporation is entitled to recover the stationery and printing charges and not the value of the tickets. Therefore, the impugned order, to the extent that it required the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.33,405/- cannot be sustained. On the second charge, the liability fixed against the petitioner is only to the extent of 2,180/-. The other amount was to be paid by an employee of the Corporation. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside, but directing that the respondent shall be entitled to recover the stationery and printing charges for the tickets that were missing from the tray handled by the petitioner and a further sum of Rs.2,180/-. Necessary adjustment in this regard shall be made by the respondent, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:20.08.2008 kdl