1*4 V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 34712 OF 2012 Between: M.P.Babu, E-601336, Driver, S/o. Suryanarayana, 34 yrs, Rajahmundry Depot, R/o. Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The A.P.S.R.T.C., rep by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2. The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., East Godavari Region at Rajahmundry, 3. The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Rajahmundry Depot, East Godavari Dist. ...RESPONDENTS 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 the action of the 3'^'^ respondent in imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increments of the petitioner for a period of 1 year with cumulative effect vide Proc No. 01/2 (18)/ 10-RJY, Dt 21-7-2011, which was confirmed by the Appellate and review authorities Vide Proc. No PA/20(8)/12 Dy.CTM/RJY, Dt 18-2-2012 and Proc No PA/20(61)12 RM-EG, Dt 21-8-2012 respectively as high handed and arbitrary action, contrary to well established principles of law, against to the principles of natural justice and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice by ordering to pay the arrears of differed wages from 21-7-2011 forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S. M. SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI T.VINOD KUMAR, SC FOR APSRTC The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010089822012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 34712/2012 Between: M.P.babu, E-601336, Driver, ...PETITIONER AND The A P S R T C Rep By Its Managing Director and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. S M SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): Sri.T.Vinod Kumar SC for APSRTC ...RESPONDENT(S) The Court made the following : WP.No.34712 of 2012 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 34712/2012 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is challenging the proceedings dated 21.07.2011, whereby the respondents imposed the punishment of deferment of annual increments of the petitioner for a period of two years with cumulative effect. 2. The petitioner was working as a driver from the year 2009 and his services were regularized In the year 2010. A charge sheet dated 11.03.2011 was issued and the petitioner submitted his explanation. The respondent imposed the punishment of deferment of withholding of annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that a major punishment was imposed on the petitioner without conducting any enquiry, the appeal and review authorities also rejected the petitioner’s appeal and review. The petitioner was charged of causing of an accident, resulting the damage to the bus on 11.10.2010. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner was found WP.No.34712 of 2012 responsiWe for rash and negligent driving, resulting in collision of bus which resulted in damage to the bus in front side. It is submitted that the preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Assistant Manager and basing on the evidence available on record punishment was imposed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and also perused the material on record. 5. As seen from the impugned proceedings, the impugned proceedings are issued based on the explanation submitted by the petitioner and the evidence on record. This would amply clarified that there was no enquiry conducted even as per the counter the respondents have stated that the preliminary enquiry was conducted. A preliminary enquiry and an explanation and a charge sheet filed would not considered before issuance of major punishment of deferment of annual increments of the petitioner for a period of two years with cumulative effect. The punishment imposed on the petitioner is without conducting any enquiry, this Court set aside the punishment imposed on the petitioner. 4 WP.No.34712 of 2012 ft. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 21.07.2011. There shall be no order of costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR REGISTRAR ^^N^FFICER ASSISTA.NT //TRUE COPY// SE To, 1. The Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Vijayawada. 2. The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., East Godavari Region at Rajahmundry, 3. The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Rajahmundry Depot, East Godavari Dist. 4. One CC to Sri S. M. Subhan, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri T. Vinod Kumar, SC for APSTRC [OPUC] 6. Three CD Copies. ssb ft HIGH COURT DATED:19/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.34712 of 2012 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS