Disciplinary action against an employee must be based on enumerated misconduct; failure to issue correct tickets constitutes valid grounds for penalty.

ORDER :

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“….. to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order, dt.26.04.2012 of the 3^rd respondent as confirmed in 2^nd respondent order, dt.15.07.2012 imposing the punishment of postponement of 2 Annual Grade Increments with cumulative effect besides treating the period from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement as Not on Duty, as arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and APSRTC Employees CCA Regulations, 1967 to the extent the impugned order is against me by modifying the same and consequently direct the respondents to pay back salary, incremental arrears with interest @ 12% p.a. and grant costs of the proceedings….”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Conductor in APSRTC on 01.01.2010 and worked at the Addanki Depot for some time. Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to Chirala Depot, where she worked up to 20.10.2010, on which date she was placed under suspension. The 4^th respondent issued a charge sheet, dated 20.10.2010 alleging that the petitioner failed to observe the rule issue correct tickets to the passengers and close the S.R. with correct denomination tickets and having collected an amount of Rs.70/- from two passengers, who boarded the bus at Narsaraopet and bound for Chirala and issued less tickets worth of Rs.62/- instead of Rs.70/- and closed all denomination tickets, which in the opinion of the 4^th respondent, constituted misconduct under Regulation-28, Clauses (xxxi) and (xxv) of APSRTC Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1963. The petitioner has submitted his explanation denying the charged levelled against her. Without considering the same, a domestic enquiry was conducted and the enquiry officer gave his findings. Based on the findings, the 4^th respondent issued a Show-Cause Notice dated 03.11.2011, asking the petitioner to show cause as to why she should not be removed from service as the charges levelled against her are proved. The petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges levelled against him. Without considering the same, the 4^th respondent issued proceedings vide proceedings No.O2/95(53)/2010, dated 14.11.2011, removing the petitioner from service. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred appeal to the 3^rd respondent on 21.12.2011. The 3^rd respondent issued proceedings vide No.St.19(92)/2012-Dy.CTM, dated 26.04.2012 setting aside the order of removal and reinstating the petitioner into service, but, however, postponed two increments on permanent basis and treating the interregnum period as ‘Not on Duty’. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed Review Petition before the 2^nd respondent on 28.11.2016 and the same was rejected mechanically vide proceedings No.PA/675(99)/2016, dated 15.07.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application before the Conciliation Officer-cum-Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Ongole through APSRTC Employees Union and the same was returned by the said authority on 13.02.2020, stating that the petitioner’s application filed is not covered under the provisions of I.D.Act, 1947. Aggrieved by the order of the 3^rd respondent dated 26.04.2012, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The respondents filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and stated that, on 08.10.2010, the checking officials of Regional Enforcement Squad, APSRTC, Guntur have exercised a check on Bus No.AP27X7049 of Chirala Depot at Parchur, it was detected that the petitioner had collected an amount of Rs.70/- from a batch of two passengers who boarded at Narasaraopet and bound for Chirala and issued tickets worth Rs.62/- only @ Rs.31/- each. The petitioner has closed the SR of all denominations without issuing correct denomination of tickets to the above said passengers even after collecting the requis