Telangana High Court
WP/41134/2014 of Korlam Ganapathi Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary on 31 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.41134 OF 2014 ORDER: Heard Sri K.Rambabu, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Forests appearing for the respondents. The petitioner retired from the service on 31.01.2010, while working as the Deputy
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.41134 OF 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard Sri K.Rambabu, the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Government Pleader for Forests appearing for therespondents.
The petitioner retired from the service on 31.01.2010, whileworking as the Deputy Forest Range Officer in the Forest Departmenton attaining the age of superannuation. It is submitted by him that afterhis retirement his leave salary, A.P.G.L.I General Provident FundAmount and Group Insurance Scheme amount were not paid to him sofar. Since his pension was fixed at Rs.13,150/- per month underPension Payment Order: 22-019743-SP and the said amount togetherwith Dearness Allowance should be paid to him from February 2010onwards, but only the provisional pension of 75% of the pension payamount of Rs.9,863/- with D.A is being paid to him. It is furthersubmitted that he approached the respondent authorities on manyoccasions and requested to pay the D.C.R.G. amount and also releasethe full pension, but no action was taken. Astonishingly, he receivedan order in R.C.No.10129/2012/MB dated 25.02.2013 together with anarticle of Charge from the 4[th] respondent on 29.03.2013 mentioningtherein that during his tenure as FSO, Vatsavalasa Section, heneglected his duties, committed irregularities in raising causarinaplantation and responsible for failure of plantation causing loss to theGovernment and violated the guidelines of the FDA scheme asmentioned in the article of charge and also the loss apportioned onhim and accordingly he is liable to pay an amount of Rs.44,708/-. Forthat he gave a detailed explanation narrating the circumstances andsituation and also gave his consent to recover the loss of Rs.44,708/-from D.C.R.G. amount and to pay him the balance amount. In spite of his giving consent for recovering the aforesaid amount, the benefits infull as per his entitlement under law have not been paid to him. As perthe settled legal position, the respondents are not entitled to conductany disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner after his retirement onthe ground of neglect of duties. Therefore, the respondents are notentitled to recover the amount of Rs.44,708/- from the petitioner andthe petitioner is entitled for full pensionary benefits. It seems thatunder desperation and pressure the petitioner might have expressedhis willingness to deduct the amount of Rs.44,708/- from thepensionary benefits. Such a recovery would be illegal since under lawno disciplinary proceedings on the ground of neglect of duties can beinitiated against him long after his retirement.
In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage ofadmission directing the respondents to pay the petitioner all theretirement benefits such as gratuity, pension etcetera as per hisentitlement without making any deductions within a period of twomonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shallstand closed.
______________
R.KANTHA RAO, J
Date: 31.12.2014
MVA