PRAMEELA Vs. A P S R T C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred by the wife and sons of the deceased - driver of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the APSRTC') questioning the validity of the orders passed by the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager, Medak Region, Sanga Reddy, rejecting the appeal submitted by the said driver against the orders passed on 5.7.2008 by the Depot Manager, Zahirabad Depot, imposing on him the punishment of removal from service.

(2.) Sri P. Pandu, was engaged as a Driver Gr.II with the APSRTC w.e.f., 1.9.1988. He was inflicted with punishment of removal from service earlier on 17.5.1990 when he was involved in an accident. When he preferred an appeal against the said orders, he was reinstated back into service. When the Traffic Supervisor of Zahirabad Depot filed an adverse report that the said Pandu was unauthorisedly absent w.e.f., 17.1.2007 to 30.1.2007 without any intimation or prior sanction of leave and that he was also away from duties for 134 days during the year 2006, the said Pandu was subjected to disciplinary enquiry on two counts of charges. The 1st charge related to his unauthorized absence for duty w.e.f., 17.1.2007 to 30.1.2007. The 2nd charge relates to his absence for 134 days during the year 2006, which comprised of 23 days of leave availed and medical sickness for 68 days and absented to duties for 43 days. The Enquiry Officer who was appointed to conduct a detailed enquiry as the explanation offered by the writ petitioner for the charge sheet was not found satisfactory, conducted enquiry in accordance with the APSRTC Employees CCA Regulations and submitted his report on 2.5.2007 finding the said P. Pandu guilty of both the charges. An opportunity was provided for meeting the veracity of the findings. The said Pandu submitted his detailed explanation to the findings of the Enquiry officer on 11.7.2007 and after perusal of the said explanation, a show-cause notice was issued by the Depot Manager on 18.7.2007 calling for his explanation as to why he be not inflicted with the punishment of removal from service. An explanation followed thereto from the said Pandu on 22.7.2007. Thereafter, he was attending to his duties normally. At this stage, nearly after one year period has elapsed after issuing the show-cause notice, the Depot Manager has passed orders on 5.7.2008 inflicting on him the punishment of removal from service. Against this order of removal from service imposed by the Depot Manager, an appeal has been preferred to the Deputy Chief Traffic Manager which was received by the appellate authority on 18.7.2008. It is stated that the said P. Pandu expired on 1.8.2008 and thereafter, the present writ petitioners have submitted a representation dated 16.10.2008 to the appellate authority which was received by him on 20.10.2008 wherein the petitioners have informed the appellate authority about the demise of the said Pandu and requested the appellate authority to take appropriate action in the matter. Since the appellate authority has not moved, the petitioners herein have instituted WP No. 13310 of 2009. The said writ petitioner was disposed of on 21.12.2009 directing the appellate authority to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners herein on 16.10.2008 and allow them to prosecute the appeal preferred by Pandu. In pursuance of the said order passed by this Court, the appellate authority has passed final orders on 4.3.2010 rejecting the appeal.

(3.) I have heard Sri V. Narasimha Goud, Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri C. Sunil Kumar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation.