IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 319 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 11/09/2008 in WP NO : 19381 OF 2000 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C. , Rep. by its Regional Manager, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Dy. Chief Traffic Manager (U) Office of Regional Manager., A.P.S.R.T.C., Visakhapatnam. 3 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Maddilapalem Depot, Visakhapatnam. 4 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Waltair Depot, Visakhapatnam. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND G.R. Krishna, E. 107530 S/o. Chandraiah R/o. Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant:MR.KAMBHAM MADHAVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.M.SUBHANI (SC FOR AP WAKF BOARD) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 319 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ appeal is filed by the petitioners against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No:19381 pg 2000 on 11.9.2008. The respondent herein is the writ petitioner. He filed the writ petition seeking to declare the action of the respondents-Corporation in imposing punishment of deferment of increment for a period of two years, which shall have the effect of postponing the further increments vide proceedings No:02/104 (194) 87-WTR, Waltair, dated 6.6.1988, which was confirmed by the appellate authority vide proceedings No:PA/19/126/99-VSP(U), dated 18.11.1999 and as well as the Review authority vide proceedings No:PA/19(6)/2000-RM-VSP, dated 2.5.2000 as illegal and arbitrary. The learned single Judge having relied on the judgment of this Court reported in Kottapati Jayachandra Reddy V. Depot Manager, APSRTC., Kadiri Depot, Anantapur District & others[1] and having concluded that admittedly no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner indicating the proposed punishment after conclusion of the enquiry and having modified the punishment imposed on the petitioner for stoppage of two increments as one without cumulative effect, partly allowed the writ petition. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ appeal is preferred by the respondents-Corporation. Heard the learned counsel and perused the entire material available on record. The fact that remains undisputed is that no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner indicating the proposed punishment after conclusion of the enquiry itself and the facts of the present case on hand are akin to that of the judgment of this Court (citation-1 supra) whereunder this Court has modified the punishment of stoppage of increments with cumulative effect as the one without cumulative effect, but without any monetary benefit up to the date of that order. It is not in dispute that the above judgment has become final. At this stage, it is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner that the writ petitioner has already retired from service. In this view of the matter and in view of the undisputed fact that no show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner indicating the proposed punishment after conclusion of the enquiry, which exercise is mandate one after conclusion of the enquiry, We see no illegality or irregularity in the order of the learned single Judge. Hence, this writ appeal is devoid of merits and thereby, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ___________________________ Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar Dated: 30th March, 2009 gurc. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 319 of 2009 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 30th March, 2009 [1] 2005(6) ALD 247