Dismissed

Md.Basheer, v. The Divisional Manager

Telangana HC8 Dec 2011WP/31793/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that a pending departmental appeal prevents the premature adjudication of departmental disputes. The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the first respondent to decide the pending appeal within two months.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the First Respondent to dispose of the pending appeal preferred by the petitioner within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of thi

Md.Basheer, Vs The Divisional Manager — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

¶4

WRIT PETITION No.31793 OF 2011

BETWEEN:

Md.Basheer

…. Petitioner

AND

The Divisional Manager, Ranga Reddy Division, MGBS, Hyderabad and another

¶10

…. Respondents

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.31793 OF 2011

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned proceedings No.01/2(15)/2006H-I, dated 13-03-2007, in imposing the punishment of reduction of petitioner’s pay one incremental stage with cumulative effect besides treating the suspension period as not on duty as illegal, arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents to release the petitioner’s pay without reducing one incremental stage without cumulative effect and treating the suspension period as on duty for all purposes by considering the petitioner’s last representation, dated 23-12-2010.

¶14

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined in the respondents’ Corporation as driver in the year 1978 at Raniganj Depot and subsequently he was transferred to Hyderabad-I Depot. While he was issued a charge sheet on 17-08-2006 alleging two charges i.e. on 13-07-2006 he drove the vehicle bearing No.AP 10 Z 9765 in a rash and negligent manner and caused a major accident resulting in death of a person sleeping on the Traffic island, causing injuries to another person sleeping beside the deceased and also a lady passenger traveling in the bus, and also damages to the vehicle. After receiving charge memo, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation. Thereafter, the respondents conducted an enquiry and basing on the enquiry report final orders were passed by the 2^nd respondent – Depot Manager, Hyderabad-I Depot, on 13-03-2007 imposing punishment of reduction of pay of the petitioner by one incremental stage with

¶15

cumulative effect, besides treating the suspension period as not on duty. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1^st respondent – the Divisional Manager, Ranga Reddy Division, MGBS, Hyderabad. Till now, the respondents have not taken any action on the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition.

¶16

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶17

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the departmental enquiry was conducted without giving any opportunity to the petitioner and that the appeal filed by the petitioner is still pending with the respondents.

¶18

5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, submits that the petitioner as a driver is found to be responsible for causing a major accident causing death of a person sleeping on the traffic island and also serious injuries to two persons, and therefore, taking the lenient view, the authority had imposed a very minor penalty and that the petitioner preferred the appeal with delay.

¶19

6. Once the petitioner preferred an appeal against the impugned order, and the same is pending before the 1^st respondent, the 1^st respondent is under obligation to pass appropriate orders on the said appeal in accordance with law.

¶20

7. Therefore, without going to the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent – The Divisional Manager, Rang Reddy Division, MGBS, Hyderabad, to dispose of the appeal, dated 23-12-2010, preferred by the petitioner within a period of tow (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶21

_______________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J

¶22

December 08, 2011.

¶23

KTL

Md.Basheer, v. The Divisional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md.Basheer, v. The Divisional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ch. Madhusudhan Rao Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Shaik Chand Basha, Vs a.P.S.R.T.C., Rep.by its Vice-Chairman And Managing

P.V. Subba Rao Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Pokala Veera Bhadra Rao and 26 Ors. Vs Gnrl Mngr. Andhra Bank Hyd and 2 Ors.

Smt. Akthari Begum Vs The Apsrtc.

Smt. T. Anjanamma, Vs The District Collector-cum-Chairman