THE H ON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 14946 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner is working as Driver in Nellore-I Depot of APSRTC. On 7.6.2008, he was performing duty on a service from Nellore to Vijayawada. After the trip was concluded, he found a bag in the bus, and he promptly handed over the same to the Depot Clerk, apart from informing the concerned passenger, over telephone. The passenger, in turn, came to the Depot and collected the bag. However, he complained that a gold chain, gold ring and cash, were missing from the bag. On that basis, a preliminary enquiry was caused on 27.6.2008, and a charge sheet was issued, framing a charge with the above allegation. On the same day, the petitioner was placed under suspension, pending enquiry. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Sri S.M. Subhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that had the petitioner entertained any idea of appropriating the bag, or its contents, he would not have handed over the same to the Depot Clerk, much less informed the passenger, over telephone. He contends that the question as to whether the petitioner is responsible for lost of the articles mentioned above, needs to be examined in the departmental enquiry, and there is no basis for placing the petitioner under suspension. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature, and no interference is warranted with the suspension, pending enquiry. In a way, it can be said that the petitioner became victim of his enthusiasm, to prove his honesty, by handing over a bag found by him in the bus, to the Depot Clerk. Such an act, on the part of the petitioner, on the face of it, reflects his honesty. However, whether or not the petitioner had taken away any articles from the bag, needs to be examined, during the course of domestic enquiry. Another aspect, which needs attention, is as to whether the bag came to be handled by any other person, before the petitioner traced it. Prima facie, it is evident that the petitioner has handed over the bag, where, in fact, he did not owe any obligation to any one discloses that he did not entertain the idea of retaining any property for him. This court is of the view that suspending employees, in such cases, would only persuade them, not to hand over the articles or properties, which they find in the bus. The petitioner is not accused of any other misconduct. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed, and the impugned order is set aside. The respondents are directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 11th July 2008 PAN