IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 16541 of 2008 Between: M. Yoga Narasimham, s/o. M.V.M.Gopalacharyulu, R/o. Flat No.604, Raghava Apartments, Brindavan Gardens, Guntur-6 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman and Managing Director, APSPDCL, Tirupathi, 2 The APSPDCL(Discom/Board) represented by its Chairman and Managing Director, Tirupathi. .....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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, call for the records relating to issuance of impugned Memo No.CMD/CGM/HRD/DS/AS-III/PO(DC)/F.NO.I(i) D.No.928/08 Dt. 29/05/2008 duly setting aside the impugned orders of dismissal, declare the same passed with colourable exercise of powers committing perjury etc., and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service forthwith with back wages, all consequential and attendant beneﬁts from the date of suspension dated 08/08/2001 and to grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.SUDARSHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : The petitioner was initially appointed as an Accountant in the erstwhile A.P. Electricity Board in the year 1986. He was promoted as Assistant Accounts Oﬃcer in 1996 and thereafter, as Accounts Oﬃcer on 27.01.2000. When he was working in the Oﬃce of the Superintending Engineer (Operation), Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, Guntur, he was placed under suspension, on disciplinary grounds, on 11.08.2001. The Corporate Oﬃce of the Company, the ﬁrst respondent herein, initiated disciplinary proceedings by issuing a Charge Memo, dated 02.08.2003. The petitioner submitted his explanation and departmental enquiry was conducted. The ﬁrst respondent passed an order, dated 16.07.2005, dismissing the petitioner from service. The appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Board of the Company was also rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner ﬁled W.P.No.23183 of 2005. On ﬁnding that the prescribed procedure was not followed in the departmental enquiry, this Court allowed the writ petition on 24.12.2007 and remanded the matter for fresh consideration and disposal. After such remand, the ﬁrst respondent passed an order, dated 29.05.2008, dismissing the petitioner from service. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Several grounds were urged on behalf of the petitioner, both on procedural and substantive aspects. Now, this Court is not inclined to deal with the same in detail. The petitioner had an eﬀective alternative remedy of appeal to the Board of the Company. The appellate authority would be in a better position to examine the matter with reference to the records. In fact, the petitioner had availed the remedy of appeal in the earlier round. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. In case it is presented within three (3) weeks from today, it shall be entertained without raising any objection as to the limitation. In view of the fact that the petitioner is out of service for the past several years, the appeal shall be disposed of, within a period of two (2) months from the date of its presentation. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:01.08.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS}