1 APHC010324332018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14928/2018 Between: The Depot Manager and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The Regional Secretary and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 2. The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…..to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for records relating to the award made in I.D.No.46 of 2014, dated 03.08.2015 on the file of the Labour Court, Anantapur, which was published in the Gazette vide G.O.Rt.No.10 dated 06.01.2016, as illegal, arbitrary and quash the same and pass such other order or orders…...” 2 2. Heard Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Labour, appearing for the 2nd respondent. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the workman by name Smt.P.Leelamma, worked as Conductor in APSRTC, Nandikotkur. During her service, she has committed misconduct and disciplinary action has been initiated against her. The office of the APSRTC found him guilty for the charges framed against her and imposed punishment of deferment of annual increments for a period of two years with cumulative effect besides treating the period of suspension as not on duty for the purpose of leave, wages and increments vide proceedings No.01/95 (112)/2001-NKD, dated 05.10.2022. Hence, the workman preferred appeal and the same was rejected. Thereafter, she has preferred review petition and the same was also rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the 1st respondent being APSRTC United Workers Union, on behalf of the workman, has approached Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam and filed I.D.No.46 of 2014, wherein the learned Labour Court has set aside the punishment imposed by the 1st petitioner, which is against to the facts of the case. Learned Standing Counsel finally prays to quash the order dated 03.08.2015 passed in I.D.No.46 of 2014. 3 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Labour, appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that the learned Presiding Officer of the learned Labour Court has rightly appreciated the material on record. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that whatever the alleged misconduct is only a mistake on the part of the employee and it is not with any ill intention. Learned counsel would further submit that the learned Presiding Officer of the Labour Court has rightly exercised its discretion and turned the punishment and passed award. Hence, prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the award passed by the Labour Court, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court has rightly appreciated the matter on record since it is observed in the award that the punishment imposed against the employee for deferment of annual increments for two years with cumulative effect, is not valid since the mistake done by the workman is an excusable human mistake. Further, learned Labour observed that no explanation is offered by the petitioners’ Corporation as to why the job security circular No.49/95-OPD-T, dated 24.7.1995 was not followed, in which certain guidelines were issued with regard to scrutiny of way bills and S.Rs and taking into all the circumstances, the learned Labour Court has set aside the punishment imposed by the 1st petitioner Corporation and thereby ordered release of annual increment of the workman which was with held besides treating the period of suspension as on duty. So, 4 there are no grounds to interfere in the award passed by the learned Labour Court. 6. In that view, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 21.03.2025 ARR 5 184 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14928/2018 Dt.21.03.2025 ARR