Allowed

C.S Narnyana, v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport

Telangana HC23 Sept 2023WP/30468/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition where the petitioner, a bus conductor, challenged a major punishment involving withholding of annual increment and treatment of suspension as not on duty. The court set aside the order as it was imposed without a proper inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 11.04.2014 set aside; petitioner entitled to continuity of service, increments, and back wages.

C.S Narnyana, Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

SATURDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30468 OF 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

C.S Narnyana, s/o Thirupathaiah, aged 55 years, Conductor, E 150183, Wanapart hy depot, Wanapurthy, IVahabubnagar dist.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport, Corporation, Rep by its Managing Director, Mushecrabad, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Dy Chief Traffic Manager, APSRTC, f\ilahabubnagar Division, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar Dist.

¶13

The Depot manager, APSRTC, Wanaparthy Depot, Wanapurthy, Mahabubnugar dist.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issued a Writ, order or directions more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings of the 2nd respondent NO 01120(12)12012RM MBNR, dt 11-04-2014 in conforming the major punishment of withholding of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect besides treating, the suspension period not on duty for all purpose as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the facts of the case and set aside the same in so far against to the petitioner with all consequential benefits including continuity of service, increments, all attendant benefits including back wages and pass such other order or orders in the interest of^justice as otherwise the petitioner mav suffer irreparable loss and hardship.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P. GOVINDA RAJULU Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. D. SAI MAHITHA REP

¶17

SRI.THOOM SRINIVAS (SC FOR TSRTC) The Court made the following: OROER

¶18

THE HON(IURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARIHIK

¶19

WFIT PETITION No.3O468 OF 21014

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This Writ Petition is filed challenginq tlre i>roceedings No.Ol/20(121/2012-RM:MBNR, dated 11.O4.2014, issuec Lr1' the fna respondent, as illege I and arbitrary

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that he was appo nted a-. Conductor in the respondent-Corlroration during the month of Ft bruary. l!)97. While hc was performing his duties on i9.O6.2O08, on routt: A.tmakur to Wanaparthy, a chec < was exercised and the checkinq officials r:hecked his bus at Stage 6 and issued a charge memo to him on the allcgation that he has committed cash and ticket irregularities and basing ulton t,-re report of the checking ofliciz-ls, the 3'a respondent issued chargt: sheet, dated 30.06.2008, and strspended the petitioner from servic:. Finally, the respondents passed the office order, dated 28. 11.2008, irnposing a major pdnishment of red rction of his pay by two incremer ta I s.tages with cumulative effect, br sides treating the period of suspensio-r ,1s not on duty for all purposes. Allainst which, the petitioner irled an aplrcal before the 2nd respondent and as the same was not disposed c,f, he approached this Court and Iiled W.P.No.3297O of 2010 and the sarrLe wa:; rlisyrosed o[ by this Court uide oller, dated 09. l2.20ll, with a direc ti,rn to the 2od respondent herein to consider the appeal said to hrtve b,:en^{preferred by}

¶23

¶24

PK) wp_i0468_2014

¶25

the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in acccrdance with law.

¶26

It is the further case of the petitioner that on {iling of a contempt case uide C.C.No.406 of 2014, the 2nd respondent herein issued the proceedings, dated 1 | .O4 .2014, modifying the punishment to that of withholding the annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect, which is also a major punishment. Hence, the present ',vrit petition.

¶27

Heard Sri P. Govinda Rajulu, learned courlsel appearing for the petitioner, and Ms. D. Sai Mahitha, learned counsel, representing Sri Thoom Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC, appearing for the respondents.

¶28

t earned counsel appearing for the petitione r submits that the subject matter of this writ petition is squareiy covered by the comrnon order of this Court, dated 24.07.2O18, in W.P.Nos. 17810 and 17812 of 2OO1, which has been conhrmed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.106 and 1O9 of 2}lg, dated, O7.Og.2Oi9, and the same is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶29

This Court has taken note of the submissions made by both the parties.

¶30

¶31

PK,] wp_30468_2014

¶32

7 . Having regarc to the law laid down by the Horr'ble I'p,-'x^t)ourt in the case of Kulwant Singh Gill Vs. State of Puajabr, and also as^per the Judgment of this Court in W.A.Nos.1O6 and 109 ol 2019, dated O7.O9.2O19, withhc lding the annual increment for a peri,rd of one year with cumulative efft ct is a major penalty and the respond,:n ts^()ught not to have imposed such penalt5r, without conducting arry en<1uiry. Therefore, the impugned order of the 2"d respondent is liable tc be st:t asirle.

¶33

Accordingly, -his Writ Petition is allowed and the irnpugned order uide proceedings ){o.01/2o(l2ll2OI2-RM:MBNR, dated I 1.14.2O14, is hereby set aside, e nd the petitioner is entitled to all t et: cc,nsequential benefits including^,:ontinuity of service, increments and r-,thr'r attendant benefits including L ack wages.

¶34

Miscellaneou ; applications, if any, pending in thi:; $ rit petition, shall stand closed. \o costs.

¶35

That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above. Witness the Hon'ble The Chief Justice ALOK ARADHI: , On S.rturday,The Twenty Third Day O'September Two Thousand And l-went,/ I'hre:e

¶36

1991 Supp(1 )SCCS )4

¶37

I;D/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISI-AI\LT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// t- tt:, SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To,

¶39