Sd.M.Subhaniu vs The Regional Manager And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 6596 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Sd.M.Subhaniu vs The Regional Manager And Another on 1 August, 2024

APHC01004633200
      5                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
                                        PRADESH                          [345
                                     AT AMARAVATI                         7]
                              (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
                 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                 PRESENT
                THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

                    WRIT PETITION NO.27714 OF 2005
Between:

Sd.M.Subhani                                        ... Petitioner

                                    AND

The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C.
Guntur Region, Guntur District
and another                                         ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Y.Subba Rao

Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Solomon Raju Manchala Ld. Standing counsel for respondents.

The Court made the following order:

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

standing counsel for the respondents.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was imposed with the

punishment of reduction of basic pay by two incremental stages for a

period of two years with cumulative effect. It is the case of the petitioner

that the petitioner while working as a driver caused a fatal accident on

24.02.2004. The accident resulted in the death of a minor boy. It is the

case of the petitioner that a criminal case was registered against the

petitioner was ended in acquittal and that the punishment imposed for

causing an accident is disproportionate to the charges framed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has attained the age of superannuation and that a detailed enquiry was

conducted. Upon the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority found that

the petitioner drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in

the death of a boy aged seven years.

4. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that

the scope of enquiry before the disciplinary authority and the trial

conducted in a criminal case are entirely different and distinct. The

learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Repalle, vide judgment dated

29.01.2004, found that there was no evidence to establish that the

accident occurred only due to the negligent driving of the accused therein.

The acquittal in the criminal case is on account of the police failing to

examine any proper eyewitness to the incident and the witnesses cited as

eyewitnesses were turned hostile during the examination. As such, the

said acquittal cannot be considered as a clean acquittal and the petitioner

was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt.

5. Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to unsettle the

finding of the disciplinary authority, as no grounds are set out for the

interference by this Court in the impugned proceedings.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall

stand closed.

____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH. N

KGM