1 APHC010363352019 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: 17465/2019 Between: 1. S NAGENDRAPPA, E.426563, RTC DRIVER YEMMIGANUR DEPOT, 5/0 VEERAPPA, 48 YRS H.NO.02/195, PONNAPURAM VILLAGE AND POST, NANDYAL MANDAL KURNOOL DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE A P S R T C, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PNBS, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, A.P.S.R.T.C., KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C., KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE DY CTM, O/O THE REGIONAL MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C., KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring that the action of the DM alleging cash and ticket irregularities on a Driver and the punishment of Removal imposed by the DM/YMG vide Proc No.02/95(70)/2015, dt.24-8-2015, which was confirmed by the Appellate and Review authorities dt.26-9-2015 and 10-12-2015 respectively, in confirming the punishment and the orders passed by the R2 in 2 Proc No. PA/19(04)/2016-ED, Kadapa, dt. 13-6-2016, in imposing the punishment of Reduction of Basic pay for two years with cumulative effect, besides treating the suspension period as not on duty, in so far it went against to the Petitioner as illegal, capricious, unwarranted, untenable and unsustainable and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to the respondents to Re-fix the pay of the Petitioner by adding the deferred Increments from the date of Suspension till Reinstatement, and to pay the Arrears of deference of wages forthwith and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Direct the Respondents herein to Re-fix the pay of the Petitioner by adding the deferred Increments, pending Disposal of the W.P, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S M SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 17465/2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring that the action of the DM alleging cash and ticket irregularities on a Driver and the punishment of Removal imposed by the DM/YMG vide Proc No.02/95(70)/2015, dt.24-8-2015, which was confirmed by the Appellate and Review authorities dt.26-9-2015 and 10-12-2015 respectively, in confirming the punishment and the orders passed by the R2 in Proc No. PA/19(04)/2016-ED, Kadapa, dt. 13-6-2016, in imposing the punishment of Reduction of Basic pay for two years with cumulative effect, besides treating the suspension period as not on duty, in so far it went against to the Petitioner as illegal, capricious, unwarranted, untenable and unsustainable and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to the respondents to Re-fix the pay of the Petitioner by adding the deferred Increments from the date of Suspension till Reinstatement, and to pay the Arrears of deference of wages forthwith and pass…” 2. Heard Sri S.M.Subhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner was appointed as Driver in A.P.S.R.T.C. While so, the Respondent-Authorities have removed the Petitioner from service on the ground that he issued ticket worth Rs.180/- instead of Rs.246/-. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would further submit that, subsequently, the Petitioner has preferred an appeal before Respondent No.2, wherein, Respondent No.2 had modified the punishment from removal to deferment of annual increments for a period of two (2) years with cumulative effect, besides treating the suspension period as 4 not on duty. Learned counsel would further submit that the explanation given by the Petitioner stating that while he was generating the tickets, the TIM fell down and was not working properly. The TIM wrongly generated tickets from Jedcharla to Kothakota instead of Pebbair and that due to the passengers pitiable condition and falling of TIM machine only, he issued ticket worth of Rs.180/- instead of Rs.246/-. The above said explanation was not considered by Respondents-authorities. Learned counsel would finally submit that even without monetary benefit for the relevant period, the suspension period may be considered as on duty. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondent – Corporation would submit that the scope of this Court to interfere in this type of matters is very limited. On conducting enquiry, the Petitioner was removed from service and subsequently, the Appellate Authority reinstated the Petitioner into service by imposing the punishment of reducing two increments with cumulative effect. It is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve any further concession before this Court. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, it is the contention of the Petitioner that he had given ticket worth Rs.180/- instead of Rs.246/- due to the failing of TIM and the same has not been considered by the Respondent-Authorities and thereby imposed punishment to him. As can be seen from the order dated 13.06.2016, the Appellate Authority has considered the case of the Petitioner as a final chance purely on humanitarian grounds as he has got 13 years of left over service 5 and based on the economic condition of his family. It is also observed that previously, the Petitioner was removed from service for having involved in FC case on 19.01.2015 and subsequently reinstated with a hope of change in his attitude. But he once again involved in the same irregularity of FC case on 17.04.2015 i.e., within one month from the date of reporting at Yemminagar depot on reinstatement. However, nothing is attributed against the Petitioner that with a malafide intention, he had given ticket worth Rs.180/- instead of Rs.246/-. In that view, awarding punishment of reduction of two increments with cumulative effect, and treating the suspension period as not on duty, is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct of the Petitioner. Hence, the matter requires indulgence of this Court. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by modifying the punishment of reduction of two annual increments with cumulative effect to without cumulative effect. However, the Petitioner is not entitled to any arrears of increment for the relevant period. Respondents are also directed to consider the suspension period of the Petitioner as on duty, by adjusting the same with any leave as per the availability and eligibility of the Petitioner. 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:08.07.2025 UPS 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.17465 of 2019 Dated.08.07.2025 UPS 140