APHC010291942018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 13275/2018 Between: 1. K. SRINU, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, E.NO.726589, APSRTC, VINUKONDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP ...PETITIONER AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, RTC HOUSE, PANDIT NEHRU BUS STATION, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP 2. THE DEPOT MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN., VINUKONDA DEPOT, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the order of suspension issued by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No.P2/2(03)/2018-VNK, dated 24-03-2018 as illegal, unjust, contrary to law, arbitrary, contrary to the Circular issued by the 1st respondent dated 13-03-2018, without jurisdiction, amounts to unfair labour practice, in violation of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and kept the petitioner under suspension in a casual and mechanical manner without any application of mind, and grant all consequential benefits, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A K JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SANISETTY VENKATESWARLU SC For APSRTC 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ ... to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the order of suspension issued by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No.P2/2(03)/2018-VNK, dated 24-03-2018 as illegal, unjust, contrary to law, arbitrary, contrary to the Circular issued by the 1st respondent dated 13-03-2018, without jurisdiction, amounts to unfair labour practice, in violation of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and kept the petitioner under suspension in a casual and mechanical manner without any application of mind, and grant all consequential benefits, and pass ....” 2. When the matter is called, none represented for the Petitioner. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC appearing for respondent- Corporation would submit that the present writ petition is filed impugning the order of suspension of the Petitioner issued by respondent No.2. Further, in the light of the interim order passed by this Court on 17.04.2018 in IA No.1 of 2018, enquiry was completed and petitioner was awarded with the punishment of withholding of annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect besides treating the suspension period as „not on duty‟. Hence, no further orders are necessary. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 13275 of 2018 08.07.2025 Mjl /*