JUDGMENT :

RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.

1. Heard Sri V. Padmanabha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Arjun, learned counsel representing Sri N. Srihari, learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (in short “APSRTC”) for Respondent No. 2.

2. The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:

“......issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and quash the Award passed by the 1st respondent in I.D. No. 131 of 2011 dated 10.07.2013 published on 31.08.2013 upholding the order of removal passed by the 2nd respondent and granting no relief to the petitioner as illegal, unjust, contrary to law and perverse and grant all consequential benefits and pass....”

3. The petitioner has thus challenged the Award dated 10.07.2013 in I.D. No. 131 of 2011 passed by the 1st respondent/Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Ananthapur, published on 31.08.2013 upholding the order of removal of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent.

4. The petitioner joined the services of the APSRTC as a driver in the year 1990 which were regularized w.e.f. 01.08.1991.

5. In an incident of murder of P. Anand, Assistant Manager APSRTC, Madenepally, an FIR was lodged on the complaint of one A. Prem Kumar, Superintendent (Mechanical) APSRTC Depot Mandal in which the petitioner was called for interrogation and remained in police custody from where he was released on 19.02.2010.

6. Initially the 2nd respondent issued a charge memo dated 20.02.2010 containing two charges one of abstention from a charted duty from 18.02.2010 up to 20.02.2010 without any intimation or sanction of leave, resulting into dislocation of operation of the bus services and inconvenience to the travelling public and loss to the corporation; and the other of irregular maintenance of attendance from January 2009 to February 2010, both the charges as constituting misconduct under regulations 28(xxvii) and 28(xxii) respectively of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (conduct) Regulations 1963 (for short “the Regulations 1963). To this charge memo, the petitioner filed his reply dated 24.02.2010.

7. The 2nd respondent while suspending the petitioner, issued another charge memo dated 09.03.2010 on the only charge of having willfully avoided to inform the fact of his arrest by the police on 05.03.2010 within 48 hours to the Depot authorities and concealment of facts of his arrest and remand dated 06.03.2010 in criminal case No. 21/2010 registered against him under Section 302 IPC, Madenepally Town Police Station as constituting misconduct under Regulation 28 (xxii) of the Regulations, 1963.

8. The petitioner was in judicial custody and the charge memo dated 09.03.2010 was not received to him. However, an ex-parte enquiry was conducted. Pursuant to the enquiry officer's report a show-cause-notice dated 20.06.2010 was issued to the petitioner for removal from his services against which the petitioner filed W.P. No. 15905 of 2010, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2010, directing the 2nd respondent to conduct fresh enquiry after issuance of notice at least one week before the actual date and till the completion of the enquiry the petitioner was deemed to be under suspension.

9. The charge memo dated 09.03.2010 was served to the petitioner to which he submitted explanation dated 18.08.2010, inter-alia denying the charge and submitting his defense. Fresh enquiry was conducted on 04.10.2010 by the enquiry officer who submitted the enquiry report dated 20.10.2010 holding the charge as proved, against which the petitioner submitted his remarks/objections; but not being convinced with the remarks/objections the show cause notice for the proposed punishment of removal was served to the petitioner against which he filed his explanation dated 07.12.2010 and finally the order of removal dated 08.12.2010 was passed which was exhibite