IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9949 of 2008 Between: F. Rahman S/o SK. Abdullah APSRTC., Mahabubnagar Depot, Mahabubnagar district. ..... PETITIONER AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC,, Mahabubnagar Depot, Mahabubnagar district. .....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 a Writ or order or direction more particularly inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing the impugned proceedings No. 02/95(20)/2008-MBNR dated 19-4-2008 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of natural justice and set a side the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate petitioner into service forthwith and pass such orders as it may deem fit and just. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENKATESWARLU Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.9949 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Conductor in the Mahabubnagar Depot of the A.P.S.R.T.C. On 10-04-2008 he was conducting a bus on the route, Laxmipally - Tandur. In the check, that was effected between stages 3 and 4, it was found that the petitioner collected fare from three passengers, and issued tickets which were already used. On 19-04-2008 a charge-sheet was issued, framing necessary charges, and on the same day, the petitioner was placed under suspension, through separate proceedings. He assails the order of suspension, pending inquiry. Heard Sri K. Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. B.G. Uma Devi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. The petitioner is not able to point out any serious legal infirmity in the order of suspension. It was issued by an Authority vested with the power, and having regard to the reasons mentioned therein, it cannot be said that the order of suspension is without any basis. The question, as to whether the petitioner issued any used tickets, or whether the explanation offered by him is valid; needs to be considered at the domestic inquiry. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of suspension. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the respondent is directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, initiated against the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt. 01-05-2008. KO To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}