Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Unknown vs _ Pegi Original Le Surisdietion) on 20 January, 2026
Author: D Ramesh
Bench: D Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA
_ PEGI ORIGINAL LE SURISDIETION)
WO TE {OUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
"PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 332334 OF 2025
Selween:
Ch.RS. Vasu, S/o Ramaran, 48 years, mais, Occupatiar: driver bearing
Nok. 701512, Andhra Pradesh Public Transport Department(APSRTC),
Narsapuram Depot, resident of 0. No.12-7-31/G4, Murasif street. Near
ram sal temple, chinamamidipalll, Narsapur-SS4275, West Godavan
Patitioner
AND
1, The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its principal secretary to
Gavernment, Transport, Roads & Building department, secretariat,
Velagapudl vlage-522503, Thuflur Mandal, Guntur District
4. The Viee-Chairmans & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Public
Transport Department (APSRTC}, PNBS Bus station, Krishna lanka,
Viayawada-520010, Krishna District.
om
The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh Public Transport Deparirnent
(APSRTC}), main road Narsapuram-534275, West Godavari District.
Responders
Petition under Article 2268 of the Constitution of india, is Med sraying
that in ihe circurmsiances stated in the affidavit fled therewith, the High Court
may be pleased Io issue Writ more in the nature of "Writ of Mandarnus" or any
other writ order or direction, declaring the iNegal actions of the Respandents
L
}
He
q
s
: 4 OF 2028
BS
culy
hi
fen,
ey Sea
5 a 4A a Seat deve St thd £3 thee. t, 3 Coe he neds {er Lf
ee en niet eee? Fd ae Fea es eed eee chet gee ee hed ths ned "ae,
Oo 5 4. " £ os aye 'od "0% tb, anh
Penn took iach 4 y ah eS se on, shoot ae rn v4 on . of
fh Ge ie ie oo # Ee toes hed I ,
a, 8 ¢ we ea a ", on a ¢ $% et ier
Loe aa oot TPs 6S when weet Ae] stpot Sere aed yer foe , £55 Lh
a & me N G & eo ce By BE Be
mee C4 fe EB ge a ol AY a So te
i a ar re a GC HB ee wi "ha
"poke, g oe ary 4 , ~, roe / oe fs', oo oo 4
52 m - if . ei
on co as rn ne ® Se
& C8. 4 & Sa o 2 8 & B
_ 7 Y cai] 8) iced ot rt . 4 "% 4 Son . oo ed
Esc scones th Meek seed ? jabs 2. ay Pad ib? rae? ewe botaps
" 3 cree 5, . ooo saeco nae t7 re Sa 3 ES
. " eee 7 ewe "egy
a te . Mm S34 be c eS , ve . ie Boe Sooo /
ard popes we wd oe TH aft os ae hove yee Pee vanes
A eee. 907 oon, ree a $f3 vn freee, os aft shee? 4 KA beer se Seee
iter, heed yer cheer $ ee Saar. Sidi se oe 'del oh. a) whee oS%
oe we OSG a>: oh, "Ga ty add
"2 ie Mr od . Puan bebe ¢ od a % feos ye ben 'eheee
haa) an © doo nr © mah By, nn +s)
'e ne nn gc my eA wine
id posse eee or eee sgeees a vee fo ge a Aeet "CS 4 a hy 3
ees Pat a; aeen 'ee Sen ares agen o% Seder yer ia re eter ae abe
vet ¢ "wees Bee od ey £9 he a FE . ie owen
we ny aeene 'ee Fs nore. " "ey veeee i"
sa oc <7 n\n a 7 ne er a; a
org ce. wh pnd 3 peed bP nee feee heed teed bad 1% "en ,
oo ; of £3 eewen, lox, 4 Z weree ebeed
"gph Migs tose aot LP an Lf 43 be vA he fon LA bees it 33 xe. "om
Ay ee tf nr gk eg SE
4 tu bene, te lowe <7 a3 hoe G 1 no Gt An, ae
Stee EME BS sa Se gy on OO a Sih
Me Be tw % a8 a ote asd ay
3 & tt © Ge ogee rr ne pond Kw ;
aS Jee ten on vteet vhees "Cy a eheoe " eae ry -
&. ee ra 2 Ge " os b, a
¢ me oS us f m, mn
a ye ES 2 2 om & mw a nn ane
"eed é a "es $f eens o . a poe 87 . oo m ver os oe "eet
oe en CH yr ge ten ZE tne ne baat B 48 peed ey oy ae heen %
ee fee Aa tn teee Sea aoe) yr ees whee wwere ee % ebook a pa
Nop See 0H wees ae a3 "ye ea ron £3 eon on Let
tng we ae i hed a3 vores
Fg
seer 4
£o%
thd
uy a & Be w 8B on ee a sos
£N4 ( Oo 2 @ £& EF © mM & te pe
oy ee ee © ee se ee ge S
an 5 Bp & ed Gg 1G a "ge 4 ea ok a bi "4
ent ce iy ge Ho heed oF "3 en "5 ee] So 4 nore,
cs wet w
a
oo
".
: ~
NS
} ee
R
Q
writ
on
ice
ey
fakes nat
eader
Bets
p
, offers to fle Vakalat and seeks
a
8
»
3 ORDER:
The Court made the folowinc
isarmed Standing Counsel takes not
As
sponcdent Not,
ori YT. Vinod Kumar,
behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and
Learned
time to fle counter affidave.
Heard Sri M.Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Sn T.Vined Kumar, learned Standing Counsel anpearing for the
respondent Nos? and 3,
The above writ petition is fled impugning the suspension order
issued by respondent No.3 vide No.NA ASB 4V2025-NSP. dated
G3. 4 BOSS,
Leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order of
suspension of the petitioner fs confrary fo the Circular No.POOU2O49,
dated 01.01.2019. Learned counsel has drawn attention of the Court to
3.2.1 of Circular, wherein, { was mentioned that any employee found in
breath analyzer check for the 1 of 2" time and # i records
=30mg/1O0m!, suspension is not warranted. Nf it is 3° time and the
employee found in intoxication en-route, Suspension is warranted. He
aiso would submit that a breath analyzer feat was conducted to the
petiioner on 04.14.2025, whersin if was recorded as 30 moft00 mi on
first time and 34 maida mi on second time. He also would submit that
the suspension of the petiioner is not warranted as per thse
aforementioned circular,
Sri T.Vined Kumar, learned Standing Counsel would submit that
the petitioner is on duty. Since the petitioner is on duty and is in
intoxication condition, the petitioner was placed under suspension,
A perusal of the aforamentionad Circular, it is pertinent fo extract
S.2.Major offences, hereunder:
| SLNo. "Nature af ivagalaniy
Sonate tewtewy conn anenannnnew esas sanannnnnsneitetessennee neetesrenenmunnve ce
$2.4 found in breath analyser ;
| 822 Sadmalddad sioahel Found in "Majong
Ce tee UO Majer2 | Qefernent of increment for Was pears
with oumufative efiectReductinn of pay i
hy two inererertal stages with |
| cuMndative affect precedad by Damastic
mares: Pee weet . . ; ; = . rennaanaan
: : 2" time PT Major | Reversion ta jowar cadre idlowine
aSOmgN Oval alochat | aS ; ene,
| Oomestic Enquiry. Suspension aot
warragted. If reversion is nat sagsibhey,
| award Majord punishment. Family |
counseling, Hf the smplayse is wing
"Stine "Majon' Reomval fron seates preneded By
| Domestic Enquiry duly follwing |
: sfputated daciginary prenedure, |
SUSHAOSION warranted
check,
SOSNARORANE
hroath analyzer check, ert-route. i Bamestic Enquiry daly follawing |
i shoulated srocedura. Suspensions |
in the case at hand, though a breath analyzer test was conducted
to the petitioner, ana charge sheet Aas been fled and no medical
examination has been conducted for collecting blood and urine samples.
Prima-facie, this Court is of the opinion that the order of suspensian of
the petitioner is contrary to the Circular No. POOU2019, dated 1.042078
Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the suspension
order issued by respondent No.g vide No. ANY4S8(142025-NSP, dated
U2.77 2025, is hereby suspended,
List the mnustter after four weeks.
TRUE CORY
Te,
ecretary io Government, Transport Roads & Buldine
cA
y
State of Andhra Pracesh, secretarial, Velagapud
village-822503, Puhur Marcial, Gureitur 'District iby OFECLAL
Tre Vice-Chairmans & . Mariaging Grector, Anchra ssh Public
Transport Department CAPSRTC} PNBS Bus sistion, Kishnea lanka,
Viliayawada-520016, Krishna Cistrict
ae
Can
Tre Bro Manager, Andhra Pradesh F a uote Transport Department
iAddresses (Nos. 2&3 BY RPAD)
oe
One CC to Si. K SRINIVASA PRASAD, STANDING COUNSEL
CONE gk
ar
ted
'
One spare copy
JSS
HIGH COURT
OR, J
OATEO SON S028
LIST THE MATTER AFTER FOUR WEEKS.
"
ORDER
WP.No.S3334 of 2028 SAR HONS TRS .
ee Sar Se SX Se SS ; os ee Rae RS Xs Qe is OS oa SRR SS RS wos oF SSS Ng eS & SEES x we. se ONS er 5 yi SS Seo S Sey NN REN ws .
x < x Ss ve xe ~ Re FA Sas aes SNH os as :
SUSPENSION