G S R PRASAD MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT Vs. DEPOT MANAGER A P S R T C AAVANIGADDA KRISHNA DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) It appears, observations of a Division Bench of this Court in the judgment in D.S.P. Rao vs. APSRTC based on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Managing Director, ECIL vs. B. Karunakar were sought to be distinguished and confused by making reference to a judgment of the Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. S.K. Sharma. A Bench of this Court has gone into the various aspects of the importance of not taking any decision to punish before the enquiry report is served upon the delinquent officer and his comments are obtained and when the Court would find the entire proceeding void and when the Court would require the delinquent, before interfering with the punishment, to show that he has suffered any prejudice, are explained. In Managing Director Non-Conventional Energy Dev. Corp. of A.P. Ltd. vs. G. Tirupathi Rao this Court has quoted from Karunakar's case the passage which includes the effect on the order of punishment already made in a case when the report of the Enquiry Officer is not furnished to the employee and what relief in such a case the Court would grant, including the passage which reads as follows:

(3.) After referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. S.K. Sharma (3 supra), on which learned Counsel for the respondent -Corporation has placed reliance and which has prompted the learned single Judge to refer the matter to a Division Bench for decision, this Court in the case of Managing Director Non-Conventional Energy Dev. Corp. of A.P. Ltd. vs. G. Tirupathi Rao (4 supra) has stated as follows: