HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.40839 of 2014 Date: 31-12-2014 Between G.Thirumalaiah … Petitioner and APSRTC, Rep. by its MD, Musheerabad, Hyderabad; and 2 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.40839 of 2014 Order:
Heard Sri P.Govinda Rajulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents- Corporation.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the final order dated 01-4-2002 passed by the 3rd respondent in imposing major punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of two years with effect on petitioner’s future increments without conducting a departmental enquiry and following APSRTC Circular No.1/1999, dated 19-02-1999, as illegal and arbitrary, and set aside the same with all consequential benefits including restoration of deferred increments with all attendant benefits and arrears.
3. The petitioner was a conductor in the respondents-Corporation. On the ground that he committed cash and ticket irregularities while conducting service on 15-02-2001 on route Puttur to Nagari, a charge-memo was issued to him against which, he submitted an explanation denying the charge levelled against him. Thereafter, an order imposing punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect was imposed against him. Challenging the said punishment, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the punishment imposed against the petitioner is a major punishment, which cannot be imposed without conducting any enquiry. Therefore, the punishment is liable to be set aside.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Kulwant
[1]
Singh Gill v. State of Punjab , wherein it was held that punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect is classified as a major penalty under the relevant service regulations. For imposition of such a penalty, it is essential to conduct domestic enquiry. The learned counsel also placed reliance on an unreported judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.276 of 2006, dated 06-11-2014, wherein it was held that though there was delay in filing the writ petition, imposition of major punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect without conducting departmental enquiry was illegal and modified the same by treating the punishment to be as the one without cumulative effect.
6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents-Corporation opposes for setting aside the punishment.
7. Obviously, a major punishment was imposed on the petitioner without conducting any enquiry, which is not in accordance with law. Therefore, the punishment imposed by the 3rd respondent is modified to that of stoppage of annual increment for a period of two years without cumulative effect. However, the petitioner is not entitled for any monetary benefits.
8. With the above modification in the punishment, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs.
R.KANTHA RAO, J.
31st December, 2014. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.40839 of 2014 31st December, 2014. (Ak)
[1] 1991 Supp.(1) SCC 504