1 APHC010377542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 19739/2025 Between: 1. N NAGAVALLI, W/O BANAVATHU VENKATESWARARAO, 51 YEARS, FEMALE, OCCUPATION CONDUCTOR BEARING NO.E.702178, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (APSRTC), JANGAREDDYGUDERN DEPOT, RESIDENT OF H.NO. 15-47/1, MARUTHI NAGAR, CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL- 534460, CHINTALAPUDI, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.(MOBILE NO.9346332156) ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT(TRANSPORT), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION APSRTC, PNBS BUS STATION, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (APSRTC), MAIN 2 ROAD JANGAREDDYGUDERN,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MULLAPUDI SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVASA PRASAD SC For APSRTC 2. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.19739 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue Writ more in the nature of “Writ of Mandamus” or any other writ order or direction, declaring the illegal actions of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 more particularly respondent No.3 removed me on 14.06.2024 in violation of serial No.2.2.2 of Annexure-ll of the circular No.PD01/2019, Dated.01.01.2019; principles of natural justice; Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India is very arbitrary, illegal, unjust and set aside the impugned removal proceedings No. 02/95(82)/2023-JRG, dated. 14.06.2024 and the impugned suspension order No.02/95(82)/2023-JRG, dated.02.02.2024 and impugned charge sheet No.02/95(82)/2023-JRG, dated.02.02.2024 issued by the respondent No.3 and consequently to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to reinstate me together with all benefits treating the entire period of suspension and removal as spent on duty and release monetary and other service benefits pending disposal of the above writ petition…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and learned 4 Standing Counsel for A.P.S.R.T.C. appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 3. The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor at Tanuku bus depot on 13.01.2013. On 23.06.2023, while she was on duty at Jangareddygudem depot, a check was conducted and found that she has collected Rs.120/- from four passengers and shortage of tickets, totally amounting to Rs.180/-. Accordingly, the respondents have conducted an enquiry and passed the final orders on 14.06.2024 removing the petitioner from services. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The only contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said punishment is excessive and contrary to the guidelines issued by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation in Circular No.PD 01/2019 dated 01.01.2019. In that circular, the punishments were notified, wherein clause 2.2.C&T deals with fare collected ticket not issued/fare collected lower denomination issued/issue of unconcerned or old tickets. In the said circular, under clause 2.2.C&T, sub-clause 2.2.2 prescribes the punishment of deferment of increment for two years with cumulative 5 effect/reduction of pay by two incremental stages with cumulative effect preceded by charge sheet, besides recovery of 10 times of the total ticket amount. But, in the instant case, for difference of Rs.180/-, the respondents have straightaway removed the petitioner from services, which is contrary to the punishment notified in the said circular. 5. Reply to the same, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that in fact, the petitioner was involved in similar type of offences earlier also. On 27.05.2023, for the same offence she was awarded punishment in Case No.02/95(31)/2023-JRG postponing her one increment with cumulative effect and imposed penalty of Rs.400/-. As the petitioner is a habitual offender and considering the same by following the procedure, the respondents have passed the impugned orders and the same are in accordance with law. 6. Considering the submissions, on perusal of the record and also the circular placed along with the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that the punishment imposed by the respondents is excessive and contrary to the punishments notified in the circular dated 01.01.2019. 6 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned orders dated 14.06.2024 and remanding the matter to the authorities to reconsider the issue once again in terms of the circular dated 01.01.2019 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 08.04.2026 Ivd 7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.19739 of 2025 Dated: 08.04.2026 Ivd