K.Y. Dass, v. Apsrtc, Rep. By Managing Dir. And 3 ORS,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.26291 OF 2007

ORDER

1.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: ".... to issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent insofar as imposing punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect and in directing to treat the entire intervening period i.e., from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement as 'Not on Duty' for the purpose of increments, seniority and wages vide proceedings No.Steno/19(67)/2004-DVM:

KMM, dated 26.11.2004, as illegal and arbitrary; to set aside the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to grant increments to the petitioner and treat the suspension period as 'On Duty' for seniority and wages, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."

2.

Heard Sri G. Ravi Mohan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. P. Rajani Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3.

It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Security Guard in the respondent-Corporation in the year 1979 and thereafter, he was appointed as conductor in the year 1983, and he was discharging his duties as such. While so, on 26.2.2004, the checking officials conducted check and alleged

that he committed cash and ticket irregularities. The disciplinary authority construed the alleged irregularities as misconduct. The disciplinary authority, after conducting enquiry, and for the proven misconduct, removed the petitioner from service vide order dated 8.7.2004. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority vide order dated 26.11.2004 set aside the removal order while directing reinstatement of the petitioner and while imposing punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect and while directing to treat the entire intervening period from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement as not on duty for increments, seniority and wages. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.

4.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, the disciplinary authority imposed punishment of removal and that the appellate authority while setting aside the order of removal, ought not to have imposed the punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect and it ought not to have directed that the entire intervening period from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement be treated as 'not on duty' for increments, seniority and wages.

5.

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondentCorporation contends that the disciplinary authority had rightly imposed the punishment of removal on the petitioner and the appellate authority took a lenient view and set aside the removal order while imposing punishment of deferment of annual increment of a period of one year and while directing to treat the entire intervening period from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement as not on duty for increments, seniority and wages, and hence, no interference is called for by this Court.

6.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned Counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered view that while setting aside the order of removal passed by the disciplinary authority, the appellate authority ought not to have imposed the punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect. Therefore, this Court feels that ends of justice would be met if the punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect is modified to that of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect. 7.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of modifying the punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect, imposed by the appellate authority on the petitioner, to that of deferment of annual

increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect and without monetary benefits. The order impugned is modified to the above extent only. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 25th October, 2018 Nn

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.26291 OF 2007 25.10.2018 Nn