APHC010693482018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33437/2018 Between: 1. SMT.K.RAJESWARI, C.NO.942822 EX.CONDUCTOR, W/O N.VENKATA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O GUDEM VILLAGE AND POST, BADVEL MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC., BADVEL DEPOT, BADVEL, KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER, APSRTC., KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER APSRTC, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, APSRTC, KADAPA ZONE, KADAPA, KADAPA 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 toto issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in I.D.No.147/2014 dt.30-01-2018 Published in G.O.Rt.No.114 dt.13-03-2018 on the file of Honorable Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapur and Quash the same as it is illegal, arbitrary and disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct committed by the petitioner, consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and all attendant benefits and back wages and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 2 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 Suspend the operation of the Award of the Honorable Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Anantapur in I.D.No.147/2014 dt.30-01-2018 Published in G.O.Rt.No.114 dt.13-03-2018, pending disposal of Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR 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: 33437/2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “… pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in I.D.No.147/2014, dt. 30.01.2018 Published in G.O.Rt.No.114, dt. 13.03.2018 on the file of Hon’ble Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapur and quash the same as it is illegal, arbitrary and disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct committed by the petitioner, consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and all attendant benefits and back wages and pass ….” 2. Heard P.V.N.Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aravala Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has joined as Conductor on contract basis in respondent-Corporation in the year 2009. A charge has been framed against her relating to an incident which is alleged to have been occurred on 08.06.2011, wherein she has closed the STAR document, not punched the tickets with an intention to reuse them. Learned counsel would submit that no financial loss caused to the respondent-Corporation. At the time of the surprise visit by the Checking Inspector, the bus was over loaded with 67 passengers. Making wrong entry is only excusable mistake. She has issued tickets. Learned counsel would submit that the punishment which was imposed against the petitioner 4 removing her from service is disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has preferred appeal, review which were dismissed. Then she has approached the labour Court vide I.D.No.147 of 2014 and the same was also dismissed. Learned counsel would submit that the punishment imposed against the petitioner is disproportionate to the alleged incident. An opportunity may be given to the petitioner to be heard before setting aside the impugned order. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent-Corporation would submit that petitioner has done the misconduct deliberately only with an intention to reuse the tickets. Petitioner is not a regular employee to the Corporation. Her appointment as Conductor is on contract basis. Because of the misconduct of the petitioner, she was rightly terminated from service. Learned Standing Counsel finally submits that there are no grounds to interfere in the impugned award. The scope of judicial review against the award passed by Industrial Tribunal is limited except on the occasions where the order is perverse and passed ignoring the material facts. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, the alleged misconduct of the petitioner is proved before the enquiry authority. Basing on the report of the enquiry authority, her services were terminated by the disciplinary authority. The appellate authority and the revisional authority did not choose to interfere in the orders passed by the disciplinary authority. As rightly put by learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner was working on contract basis as a Conductor. When misconduct is 5 alleged and proved against an individual, the action of the respondent- Corporation in terminating her from service is on correct lines. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 01.07.2025 SCS 6 195 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.33437 of 2018 Dated.01.07.2025 SCS