THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK W.P.No.20444 of 2024

ORDER:

The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

“To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned Order No.E2/114(16)/2024-ED:KRZ dated 19.7.2024 issued by the 1st respondent as being unjust, arbitrary and non-application of mind and consequently set aside the same and hold that the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated to duty as Accounts Officer with all consequential benefits”.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Madisetty, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for respondent No.3 and perused the record.

3. According to the petitioner, while he was working as Accounts Officer in the Respondent Corporation, he was placed under suspension vide Proceedings No.E2/114(16)/2024-ED:KRZ dated 19.7.2024 based on the news clipping published in Sakshi Newspaper under the caption “RTC LO ADHIKARI CHETI VATAM” on 24.3.2024 and later in other newspapers i.e. Eenadu and Prabhata Vartha. Thereafter, a charge memo was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted his explanation to the said charge memo on 23.7.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reasons mentioned in the impugned suspension order do not attract the ingredients of Regulation No.18 of TGSRTC Employees (CC&A) Regulations. It is stated that placing an employee under suspension is almost a stigma and during the period of suspension, the incumbent is not permitted to work and further he will be paid only subsistence allowance, which is normally less than his salary and suspension will have serious impact on future service of the employee. It is further stated that the petitioner was already transferred from those places and presently working in Ranga Reddy district and therefore there is no scope of tampering of any evidence relating to the case, and moreover it is burden on public exchequer and that enquiry can go by posting the employee to elsewhere. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner prays this Court to set aside the charge sheet/suspension order dated 19.7.2024.

4. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent Corporation submits that the petitioner while working as Assistant Manager (F) at AO/WL office, Warangal, a news item was published in Saakshi Newspaper with a caption “RTC LO ADHIKARI CHETIVATAM” and based on the vigilance report, the then Executive Director, Karimnagar has nominated Smt.P.Swapna Kumari, Deputy CAO/KR as the Enquiry Officer for conducting preliminary enquiry into the allegations made in the vigilance report and based on the preliminary enquiry report, a charge sheet bearing No.E2/114(16)/ 2024-ED/KRZ dated 19.7.2024 was issued to the petitioner, duly placing him under suspension vide impugned proceedings dated 19.7.2024, pending a detailed enquiry. It is further stated that the petitioner being a frontline Supervisor of Accounts wing, had utterly failed to exercise efficient control on his subordinate staff causing abnormal delay in making payments pertains to private hire bills, arrears bills, settlements of deceased employees and is responsible for the irregularities occurred. It is also stated that the petitioner has to verify and enquire with the clerks about the pending cases and see that the cases are disposed of at the earliest, which he failed to do so. Further, the petitioner has failed to follow the instructions of Accounts Officer, Warangal with regard to pending cases and had not taken initiative to monitor the clerks to clear the cases, which resulted in long pendency of cases, which not only ruined the reputation of the Organization, but also created unrest among the employees. The petitioner is fully responsible for long pendency of cases and for delayed payments. Further, to give ample opportunity to the