APHC010363332019 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: 17468/2019 Between: 1. S NARENDRAPPA, 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 APSRTC, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PNBS, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C., KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE DY C T M, 0/0 REGIONAL MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C., KURNOOL REGION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPOT MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C., NANDYAL DEPOT, 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/NDL vide Proc No.02/95(1 18)/2014, dt.19-1-2015, and the orders passed by the Dy.CTM/Kurnool in Proc. No. St/19(20)/2015-Dy.CTM-0, dt.15-03- 2015, in imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment for two 2 years with cumulative effect, besides treating the suspension period as not on duty, in so far it went against to the Petitioner as illegal, and the orders passed by the R2 in Proc No. PA/19 (57)/2015-R.M.K Kurnool, dt.15-7-2015, in confirming the punishment 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: 17468/2019 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/NDL vide Proc No.02/95(118)/2014, dt.19-1-2015, and the orders passed by the Dy.CTM/Kurnool in Proc. No. St/19(20)/2015-Dy.CTM-0, dt.15-03-2015, in imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment 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, and the orders passed by the R2 in Proc No. PA/19 (57)/2015-R.M.K Kurnool, dt.15-7-2015, in confirming the punishment 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. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri S.M.Subhan, 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 failed to issue proper ticket to a passenger. Learned counsel would further submit that, subsequently, the Petitioner has preferred an appeal before Respondent No.3, wherein, Respondent No.3 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 not on duty vide orders dated 15.03.2015. Learned counsel would further submit that the punishment which was 4 awarded to the Petitioner is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Even if the alleged misconduct is taken as true, it is only a mistake on the part of the Petitioner, but nothing is substantiated that, with a malafide intention the Petitioner has done the said act. Learned counsel would further submit that, deferment of two increments with cumulative effect may have impact and create loss to the service of the Petitioner as a Driver. Learned counsel would finally pray to allow the petition by setting aside the impugned order to the effect of imposing penalty of two increments with cumulative effect. 3. Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC would submit that, it is not the case that Respondent-Authorities have not followed the procedure under law. Respondent No.3 has rightly interfered and modified the punishment awarded against the Petitioner since it is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Learned Standing Counsel would further submit that there are no grounds to interfere. Learned Standing Counsel finally submits that, viewed from any angle, there are no circumstances warranting interference of this Court. 4. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, nothing is attributed against the Petitioner that, with a malafide intention he failed to issue proper ticket to the passenger. As can be seen from the order passed by the Appellate authority, the petitioner as a Driver is not familiar with the TIM and it may have struck up at the time of issuing the ticket, and he might have pressed another button which resulted in generation of some 5 statement like paper. The Appellate Authority also observed that the educated passenger made a mistake and the un-educated driver operating TIM also made some mistake, which may be unintentional. All the other 32 tickets are proper except the ticket in the instant case, due to struck up of TIM. The appellate authority after perusing the personal records of the Petitioner, having found that it is the first case of removal in cash and ticket irregularities, considered the case of the petitioner. In that view, awarding punishment of reduction of two increments with cumulative effect is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct of the Petitioner. Hence, the matter requires indulgence of this Court. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by modifying the punishment of two annual increments with cumulative effect to without cumulative effect. 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.17468 of 2019 Dated.08.07.2025 UPS 133