HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT APPEAL No. 1031 OF 2014 14-07-2014 BETWEEN S. Venkateshwara Rao …Appellant And The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, rep., by its Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another …..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT APPEAL No. 1031 OF 2014
JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy)
This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 18-02-2014 passed by the learned single Judge vacating interim order dated 13-08-2013 in WPMP No. 26934 of 2013 in Writ Petition No. 21971 of 2013.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as under:
The appellant joined the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (Corporation) as a Mechanical Chargeman in the year 1986. Later on, he acquired promotions and through order dated 16-09-2010, the competent authority promoted him as Depot Manager and he was posted at Tadepalligudem Depot. He was also placed under probation. A charge sheet dated 13-09- 2012 was served upon him alleging certain acts of indiscipline. Since the explanation submitted by the appellant was not satisfactory, departmental enquiry was conducted and through order dated 01-07-2013, the Corporation imposed the punishment of reversion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) Class-
II. Challenging the same, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. 21971 of 2013. WPMP No. 26934 of 2013 was filed, with a prayer to suspend the order dated 01-07-2013 and to continue as Depot Manager. While admitting the writ petition, an interim order was passed on 13-08-2013. The respondents filed WVMP No. 3003 of 2013, with a prayer to vacate the interim order. After hearing both the parties, the learned single Judge vacated the interim order through the order under appeal.
Heard Sri S.M. Subhan, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri C. Sunil Kumar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The charges framed against the appellant are a bit serious and in fact they have touched the very reputation of the Corporation. The question as to whether the enquiry conducted against the appellant suffers from any procedural lapses or whether the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer are defective in nature, in any manner, needs to be considered only at the hearing of the writ petition. Another factor which weighed with the learned single Judge to vacate the interim order is that by the time, the interim order was passed, the order of reversion has already been enforced. The question of putting the appellant back in the post of Depot Manager on the strength of the interim order does not arise.
We do not find any merit in the writ appeal and it is accordingly dismissed.
The miscellaneous petitions pending in this appeal shall also stand disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 14-07-2014 ks