WP/20751/2020 of M. Srinivasa Rao Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2024

ORDER:

In this writ [petition, ][the ][petitioner ][is ][seeking ][a ][writ ][of]mandamus [to ][declare][ the ][action ][of ][the ][respondent ][No'I ][in]issuing the [imPugned]order in [G.O.Rt.No.269 ][Rev ][(Vig-II)']Department, [dated ][16' ][lO ]['2O2O ][imposing ][a ][penalty ][of ][stoppage]of two annual [grade increments ][without ][cumulative ][effect ][in]of [the ][recommendation ][from the ][respondent ][No'2 ][by ][way]spite of a report [d ][ated ][28'08'2016 stating ][that ][there was no loss ][of]revenue [caused ][to ][the ][State ][Ex-Chequer ][and ][no ][malafide]intention [of the ][petitioner ][was ][involved and ][in ][spite ][of the ][report]from the [Inquiry ][Officer ][dated ][19'12'2O17 ][hotding ][that ][the]charges [are ][not ][proved ][against ][the ][petitioner' ][as ][illegal']arbitrary, [colorable ][exercise ][of ][power' vindictive ][attitude ][and]alsoinexercisethepowerofdisciplinaryauthoritythoughhewas an appellate [authority, ][as ][illegal' ][arbitrary ][and to ][set ][aside]or quash [the ][same ][and ][direct' ][the ][respondents ][to ][grant ][all]consequential [benehts ][including ][promotion ][to the ][petitioner ][on]par with his [junior ][and ][to ][pass ][such other order or orders ][in ][the]interest [of ][justice]

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writpetition are that the petitioner was appointed in DirectRecruitment zLs Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO), in theyear 2OOl after participation in the selection process initiatedby APPSC, Flyderabad. Subsequently, he was promoted bytransfer as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (DCTO) during theyear 2OlO. It is submitted that a charge memo dated16. 1O.2O15 w-as issued to the petitioner on the basis of thereport of the Director General (Vig. & Enforcement Depart.ment),dated 04.06.12O15, framing two minor charges for rrllegedirregularity in finalizing the assessment on 24.112.2013 tor thetax period November, 2Ol2 to October, 2Ol3 ol a particulardealer and called for the explanation from the petitioner. Thepetitioner, though was of the opinion that rhe Central VigilanceCommission or Central Government was a third party and coulddictate to the disciplinary authority, submitted his explanationon 27.ll.2Ol5i and O7.O5.2O 16 respectively, [o the respondentNo.2, denying the alleged charges in toto and requested tr: dropfurther action in the matter. However, the respondenl. No.2being a disciplinary authoriry, instead o[ passing of orders at his. [level, sent a ][report ][enclosing the explanation ][of the petitioner ][to]the respondent No. 1 vide his letter in CCT,s 7VD,Jw-P-No. 2O7s1 [ol2U2o]

7VD,Jw-P-No. 2O7s1 [ol2U2o]

Ref.No.TS/V2 122r12015, [dated ][28'O8'2O16' ][explaining ][the]details of the [case ][and ][requested ][the ][respondent ][No'l ][to ][take ][a]lenient [view ][in ][the ][matter ][on ][the ][ground ][that ][there ][was ][no]malafldeintentiononthepartofthepetitionerwithregardtothe charges [framed ][and ][that ][there ][was no ][loss ][of revenue ][to ][the]of [the ][Government' ][It is ][submitted ][that ][the]exchequer respondent [No.l, ][without ][considering ][the ][said ][explanation ][of]ttre petitioner [and ][the report ][of the ][respondent ][No'2' ][referred]the matter [to ][the ][Commissioner ][of ][Inquiries' ][Government ][of]Telangana, [Hyderabad, ][to ][conduct ][a ][detailed ][inquiry ][into ][ttre]matter and [the ][petitioner ][appeared ][before ][the ][Commissioner ][of]and [defended ][his ][case ][with ][all ][the ][documentary]Inquiries evidenceandafteradetailedinquiry,theCommissionerofInquiries [submitted ][his ][report ][oo ][19 '12 ]['2017 ][to the ][respondent]No.l concluding [that ][the ][charges ][against ][the ][petitioner ][are ][not]In [spite of ][the ][same, ][the ][respondent ][No'l ][differed ][with]proved. the findings [of ][the ][Commissioner ][of ][Inquiries and ][accordingly']issued a [disagreement note ][calling ][for ][his explanation and ][also]as to why [a ][suitable ][penalty ][should not ][be ][imposed' ][Fursuant ][to]the said [dlsagreement ][note, ][the ][petitioner submitted ][his]detailed explanation [on ][18'06 ][2O ][18, ][ventilating ][his ][grievances]\1 ..td once again requested the respondent No'l to coqsider thedetails of the [case ][and ][requested ][the ][respondent ][No'l ][to ][take ][a]lenient [view ][in ][the ][matter ][on ][the ][ground ][that ][there ][was ][no]malafldeintentiononthepartofthepetitionerwithregardtothe charges [framed ][and ][that ][there ][was no ][loss ][of revenue ][to ][the]of [the ][Government' ][It is ][submitted ][that ][the]exchequer respondent [No.l, ][without ][considering ][the ][said ][explanation ][of]ttre petitioner [and ][the report ][of the ][respondent ][No'2' ][referred]the matter [to ][the ][Commissioner ][of ][Inquiries' ][Government ][of]Telangana, [Hyderabad, ][to ][conduct ][a ][detailed ][inquiry ][into ][ttre]matter and [the ][petitioner ][appeared ][before ][the ][Commissioner ][of]and [defended ][his ][case ][with ][all ][the ][documentary]Inquiries evidenceandafteradetailedinquiry,theCommissionerofInquiries [submitted ][his ][report ][oo ][19 '12 ]['2017 ][to the ][respondent]No.l concluding [that ][the ][charges ][against ][the ][petitioner ][are ][not]In [spite of ][the ][same, ][the ][respondent ][No'l ][differed ][with]proved. the findings [of ][the ][Commissioner ][of ][Inquiries and ][accordingly']issued a [disagreement note ][calling ][for ][his explanation and ][also]as to why [a ][suitable ][penalty ][should not ][be ][imposed' ][Fursuant ][to]the said [dlsagreement ][note, ][the ][petitioner submitted ][his]detailed explanation [on ][18'06 ][2O ][18, ][ventilating ][his ][grievances]\1 ..td once again requested the respondent No'l to coqsider the TED,Jw.P.No. 2075, of 2O2o

Analysis

TED,Jw.P.No. 2075, of 2O2o findings of the Commissioner of Inquiries and drop furtheraction in the, matter. However, the respondent No.1 did not takeany action irnmediately thereafter and after 2yz years, r_rpon thedirections of this Court in W.p.No. 13g53 of 2O2O, datedany action irnmediately thereafter and after 2yz years, r_rpon thedirections of this Court in W.p.No. 13g53 of 2O2O, datedlO.O9.2O2O, directing the respondents to conclude theproceedings against the petitioner within three monlls, therespondent No.1 passed the final orders i_e., impugned orderdated 16. 10.2020 imposing the penalty of stoppage of twoannual grade increments without cumulative effect against thedated 16. 10.2020 imposing the penalty of stoppage of twoannual grade increments without cumulative effect against thepetitioner. It is submitted that by virtue of the said orrler, thepetitioner will be deprived of his legitimate promotion as rlTO fora further period of two years and many of his juniors w,culd bepromoted as CTO. Thus, according to the learned counsel forthe petitioner', even though there was a recommendatrc,n fromthe respondent No.2 to drop the proceedings and thea further period of two years and many of his juniors w,culd bepromoted as CTO. Thus, according to the learned counsel forthe petitioner', even though there was a recommendatrc,n fromthe respondent No.2 to drop the proceedings and theCommissioner of Inquiries has held that the charges hzrve notbeen proved, the action of the respondent No.l. even though hewas an appellate authorit_y, in imposing the punishment, iswas an appellate authorit_y, in imposing the punishment, isillegal, arbitmry and assumption of the powers ,tf thedisciplinary authoritSr is accordingly discriminato ry.disciplinary authoritSr is accordingly discriminato ry.

/,

5

TtrD,.'

V.P.Nd. 20751 [of ][2O2O]

3. karned [counsel ][for ][the ][petitioner has ][drawn ][the]attention [of ][this ][Court ][to ][the ][charges ][levelled ][against ][th€]and [the ][recommendations ][of ][the respondent No'2 and]petitioner the findings [of ][the ][Inquiry ][Officer ][and the ][disagreement ][note]issued by [the ][respondent ][No'l' ][He ][placed ][reliance ][upon ][the]following [judgments ][in ][support ][of ][his ][contentions']

l.surjitGhoshVs.Chairman&Managi''gDirector,United [Commercial ][Bank and Othersr;]

2. G.Murali [Dhar ][Vs' ][Chairman ][& ][Managing ][Director']BCIL, [HYderabad2;]

3. Nagaraj [Shivarao ][Karjagi ][Vs' ][Syndicate ][Bank ][Head]OfBcer, [ManiPal and Anothera;]

4. K.Bheek5ra [Vs' ][The State of Telangana and ][Othersa;]

5. N.Rama [Rao ][Vs' ][The State ][of ][Telangana ][and]Anothers.

4. l,earned [Government ][Pleader ][for ][Service-Il ][placed]reliance [upon the ][averments made ][in ][the counter affidavit ][and]submitted [that ][the ][petitioner ][had ][passed ][orders ][in ][Form ][VAT]3O5, in his [orders number ][in ][A ][O'No'59927' ][dated ][24'12'2013]

r AIR 1995 sc 1053

2 1996 (11 ALD 897

3 AIR 1991 sc 1507

4 w.P.No-26067 of2018, dt 02't2.2019

s w.P.Nos.27689 & 27718 [of202l ]' [dr ][t ][I][ lt.2D2t]

TMD,Jw.P-No. 2o7sI of 2O2o

in the case ,rf M/s.Sai Srinivasa Bottles private Limited, Nagole,Hyderabad, allowed ineligible input tax credit of Rs_ 10,,15,703l-based on the list furnished by the dealer on their own TINnumber mentioning different dealers names and withoutverifying thc originar rax Invoices. It is submitted t hat thepetitioner, being the quasi-judicial authority, has not taken anyprecaution and failed to cross-veri$r the purchases ancl simplyallowed the input tax credit claimed by the dealer on the listfurnished by them on their own TIN numbers while mentioningdifferent deatrers narnes illegalty and it is against the conditionsof the Go.rernment issued in the Government MemoNo.267841C't'I(tl/2Ot2-8, dared tO.OZ.2Ot3, resulting in aloss of revenue to a tune of Rs. 1O,4S,7 03 / _ to tho Stateexchequer. It is submitted that as per the Vigilance sche me, theV & E department has the power to enquire into any cornplaintol corruption, misconduct, lack of integrity, or other kinds otmalpractices or misdemeanor on the part of a public siervantand he referred to Rule 12 of CCA & Conduct Rules to .submitthat the Government has jurisdiction to take any action ergainst[he members of the State Services. It is further submitte d thatthe Government has requested the Commissioner (CT) to initiatedisciplinary action against the petitioncr on the recommendations [made ][in ][the ][V ][& ][E ][report ][by ][following ][due]and [therefore, ][the ][Government ][examined ][the ][report]procedure submitted by [the ][Commissioner ][(CT) ][in ][detail ][and ][decided ][to]entrustthecasetotheCommissioneroflnquiries.Itisfurthersubmitted that [after ][going ][through ][the ][inquiry report' ][the]disciplinary authority, [i.e., ][the Government has decided ][to ][pass]a disagreement [note ][and ][thereafter, ][after ][giving ][the ][petitioner]reasonable [opportunity ][of ][hearing, ][has ][passed ][the ][impugned]order vide G.O.Rt.No.269' [dated ][16'10'2O2O ][imposing of penalty]of stoppage [of two annual grate increments ][without ][cumulative]effect. It is [submitted ][that ][it ][iS ][a minor ][penalty ][and ][therefore, ][it]doesnotrequireadetailedenquiryunderRule20ofCCS(CCA)Rules. Further, [it ][is ][submitted ][that ][the ][appeal ][against the order]of the disciplinar5r [authority ][does ][not ][lie ][with ][the ][respondent]No. 1, but it [lies ][before ][the ][Government ][under ][the ][grounds]mentioned [therein ][and ][therefore, ][the ][petitioner has ][not ][been]denied an [opportunity ][of ][appeal before ][the ][respondent ][No'l']Furt}rer,asregardsthedelayindisposingoftheappeal,itissubmitted that [it ][was ][due ][to ][the ][pendency ][of ][j ][udicial]proceedings before [the ][Administrative ][Tribunal and ][this ][Court]and is not [because ][of ][any ][reason ][attributable ][to ][the]respondents. [Therefore, ][he ][submitted ][that ][the ][writ ][petition ][is]

ETND,JV.P,No. 20Zst of 2O2O

liable to be dismissed. The learned governmen t pleaderr for therespondents thus supported ttre impugned order.supported ttre impugned order.

5. Having regard to the rival contentions to the rival contentions the rival contentions contentions and thethematerial on record, t-his Court finds that as per tJ.O.NoteNo' 111o7/S':r-C/99, dated o1.03.1999, the Governrnent ofAndhra Pradesh, General Administration (Ser.C) Department,has issued instructions that in aJI disciplinarJ/ cases, a hnaldecision on the enquiry report shall be taken b1, the concerneddisciplinary authority alone and in consultation with theAndhra pradesh vigilance commission/Andhra pradesh pubricService Commission whenever it is necessar5r as per rules andthey shall n ot seek the views/remarks of the Hezrds ofDepartments on the reports of the Enquiry Ofhcer. Furtht:r, it isnoticed that ttre respondent No.2 has gone into the report of theVigilance and Enforcement and after veri$ring the same , it isobserved that the petitioner has passed the assessment orderallowing the ineligible input tax credit from the November, 2O12to ocrober, 2or3 in the case of M/s.sai srinivasa Bottles privateLimited and against the same, the revision orders have beenpassed by the t)C (CT), Saroornagar division, date(l 2g.04.2016and in accordance therewith, the CTO Saroornagar has pa.ssed Having regard to the rival contentions to the rival contentions the rival contentions contentions and thethe TUD'Jw.P.No. 20751 [oI ][2O2O]

in TIN [No-28739217498, ][dated]effectual [orders ][vide ][orders]and raised [the ][VAT ][demand of]30.O4.2016 [in ][A'O'No'22931]Rs.43,46,835/- [for the ][above ][tax ][period and ][the ][dealer has paid]the balance [amount ][of]an amount [of ][Rs'31,19,417 ][l- ][ard]towards [ITC ][as ][on]Rs.l2,27,4lal- [has ][been ][adjusted]31.12.2013 [and ][therefore, ][there ][is ][no ][loss ][of ][revenue ][to ][the]exchequer [of ][the ][Government' From ][the ][above' ][it ][is ][noticed ][that]the respondent [No.2 ][has only ][considered ][the order ][passed by]the [petitioner, ][which has ][been revised ][by ][the ][DC ][and ][the]mistake or [error ][which has ][been committed ][by the ][petitioner]hasbeenrevised,buthewasalsosuggestedalenientviewagainstthepetitioner.AsseenfromtheinquiryreportoftheCommissioner [of ][Inquiries, ][it ][has ][been observed ][that ][it ][was ][the]Enquiry [Officer, ][who ][conducted ][the ][preliminary ][enquiry' ][had]not looked [into the important crucial ][documents' due to which]a report [was given ][in ][an ][improper ][manner' ][Further' from ][the]disagreement [note, ][it ][is ][noticed ][that ][the ][Government ][has ][not]given any [reason ][for ][disagreeing ][with ][the ][Frndings ][of ][the]Enquiry [Offrcer' ][It ][is thus ][obserwed ][that ][the ][Government ][has]decidedtodisagreewiththeinquiryreportandhasdecidedtoissue a [show cause ][to ][the ][petitioner' ][It ][is ][obsewed ][that ][the]Government [has held ][that ][the ][charge ][officer ][tailed ][to ][check]

TXD,JW.P-No. 2075, ol 2O2O

whether the TIN number pertains to the Self TIN number or theselling dealer number and that he has mentioned the serf rINnumber instead of the selling dealer TIN number, wh.ich is agross violation. There is no comment about the hndings of theCommissioner of Inquiries that the Enquiry Officer has failed toconsider the important documents before submitting his inquiryreport. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that disagreementfactors havr: not been taken and have not been properlycommunicatr:d to the petitioner. Even though the punishment ofwithholding of two annual grade increments without cumulativeeffect is a minor penalt5r, the respondents ought to haveconducted a detailed enquiry into the same as requirecl underRule 20 of O(lS (CCA) Rules.

6. Irr the case of Nagaraj Shivarao Karlagi. (cited supral, the I{on'ble Supreme Court has held as under:

"j9.

The corresponding neu bank referred to

in Section t hqs been defi.ned. und.er Section 2A of the Ac,.. tomearL a banking companA specified_ in ofumn t of the FirstSclrcdttle of the Act and includes the Sgrulicate llank. Sectton8 entpowers Lhe Gouernment to issue directions in regard tornetters of policA but there cannot be any unifonn policg u:ithregard to d{ferent disciplinary matters and. much less th<zre8 entpowers Lhe Gouernment to issue directions in regard tornetters of policA but there cannot be any unifonn policg u:ithregard to d{ferent disciplinary matters and. much less th<zreconLd be ang policg in atuarding punistatgnt b the d.elirLqu<)ntofJice..s in diferent cases. Tte punisfunent to be imposedutlte'tler nloLor or major depends upon the nattre of eut,ryutlte'tler nloLor or major depends upon the nattre of eut,ry TMD'J

W.P.N0. 2075 [1 ][of ][2O2o]

case and. [the ][grauitg ][of tLe ][miscondud ][proued' ][The]authorities [taue to ][exerci'se ][their ][judiciat ][discretion ][hauing]regard to [the ]farlrs [ord' ][ciratmstonces ][of ][each ][c:ase ][Theg]cannot [.rct und'er ][the ][dictation ][of tle ][Central ][Vigilarrce]Comrnission [or of ][the Centrol ][Gouernment' ][No ][third ][partg like]tlrc Central [Vigilance ][Commission ][or the Central ][Gouerrtment]could dictate [the ][disciplinary ][authoitg ][or ][the ][aryellate]autfaitA as [to ][hou ][theg shoutd ][exercise ][their ][pouer ][and]uhat [punishment ][they ][stauld ][impose ][on ][the ][delinquent]officer. [(See: ][De ][Smitlts ][Judicial ][Revieta ][of ][Admi ][strutiue]Action, Fourth [F'ditio.. ][p' ][309)' The ][impugned directiue ][of ][the]Ministry of [Finanre is' ][therefore' ullDttA ][unthout ][jurisdiction]and ploi [g ][contrary ][to ][thE ][staaiory ][Regalations goueruing]disciPlinory [natters'"]

7. Further, [in ][the ][case of ][K'Bheekya Vs' ][The State ][of]

Telangana [and ][Others ][(cited ][supral, ][the ][learned ][sing'le ][judge]has observed [as ][under:]

'A perusol oJ [Rule ][21(2) ][of tlrc ][CCA ][Rt es ][indicates]that tle disciplinary [authoritg ][alone ][hns to disagree ][uith ][the]findings [of ][tle ][enqtiry ][ofpr' ][The ][State ][Gouemm.ent ][itself]can initiate [tle ][disciplinary proccedings ][against ][its]emplogees' [But no ]Pou'er [is ][rrested- ][urith ][the ][Gouentment ][to]disagree [u-'ith the ]rtndings [of ][tle ][enqliry ][officer. ][ThereJore,]te impugfted' [m'emo ][daled ][3 ][5'2018 ][iss;.lr,d ][blJ ][the ][1st]respondent [disagreetng ][tltith the ][findings ][of ][tle ][enqtiry]offcer is uithout [@'npeten'e ][an'd ][antrary ][to Rute 21(2) ][oI the]CCA Rules [and ][hene' ][tlw ][same ][is ][liable to ][be ][set ][oside'"]

8- Further, [in ][N'Rama ][Rao ][(cited' suprol ]' [lhe ][learned]

single [judge ][has observed ][as ][u{rder:]

"6. lEomed. counsel for the petitioners h,,s conte'ndedthqt the enqtairy olficer l:r:s held tlnt the charges are notprttued and gaue a specif.c finding ttnt the charges leueledagatnst all th.e delinquent officers were not found guiltg of tlesand charge. But strangelA, the di,sciplirnry autlaitg lutdimposed a major punishment uide proceedings dt.O7-08-2O21Luherein the penaltg of stoppoge of tuo increments urithcutnuldtiue effect is imposed on the petitioners uhiL:h iscorttrqry to the lau laid. doun by tlrc Hon'ble SUpreme t:ourtrepofied tn Lau Nigam u. Cltqirtnan and. ManagingDirector, I.T.I. Linited. reported in AIRONLINE 2006 SC

34,?, utherein the Supreme Court has held as under:

'The <arrclusion oJ tJ@ High Court uas tnntrary tolhe consisten, ueu tdken bg thi.s Court t]1at in clEe tfu,,llsciphnary autharitg dillers with tle uiera taken bg tfuiinquiry oJfic.er, he rs bound ta giue d noti.e settirlg out hi:;tetltotiue (:otblusions to the appellant. h is onlg afier heartngrtlTe appeLLqrt that the discblinary authoritg t oul.d. at aj,!.driue at a final fuLling of guilt. Tllereafre. the emplogee,trttttlcl agttin haue to be serued urith a rat :e rehting to tlttp u nislLnLenL proposed _ "

9. ln vicu, of the same, this Court is also satislied thatvicu, of the same, this Court is also satislied thatof the same, this Court is also satislied thatthe same, this Court is also satislied thatsame, this Court is also satislied thatthis Court is also satislied thatCourt is also satislied thatis also satislied thatalso satislied thatsatislied thatthatthe Governrnent has not issued a proper disagreement n.ote andthe disciplinary authority, as well as the appellate authority,have not considered the contentions of the petitioner in. properperspective but have decided that the petitioner has cornmittedmisconduct and has imposed punishment. This Court is\therefore satisficd that the punishment is not justihed in this.-.matter. Ac,:ordin gly, the Writ petition is allowed and the ln vicu, of the same, this Court is also satislied thatvicu, of the same, this Court is also satislied thatof the same, this Court is also satislied thatthe same, this Court is also satislied thatsame, this Court is also satislied thatthis Court is also satislied thatCourt is also satislied thatis also satislied thatalso satislied thatsatislied thatthat /

//

TUD,.'w.P.I{o. m751 of 2om

respondents are therefore directed to pass appropriate orders ofpromotion to the petitioner on par with his juniors and alsogrant all consequential benefits to the petitioner expeditiously,preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order.

10. Accordingly tlle writ petition is allowed. Thereshall be no order as to costs.

1 1. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this w,rit petition, shall stand closed.

SD/. K. AMMAJIASSISTANT REGISTRARECTION OFFICER

//TRUE COPYII

To1The Principal Secretary, to the [Govemment ][Revenue Department Secretariat]2The Commiisioner Saifabad, Hyderabad, State of Commercial [of ][Telangana. ][Taxes, Government of Telangana,]-Nampally, Hyderabad.1The Principal Secretary, to the [Govemment ][Revenue Department Secretariat]2The Commiisioner Saifabad, Hyderabad, State of Commercial [of ][Telangana. ][Taxes, Government of Telangana,]-Nampally, Hyderabad.3The Principai Secretary to the [Governrnent, Revenue ][(Vigilance-ll)]Department State of T6langana, [Secretariat, Saifab-l9..Hyderabad.]Department State of T6langana, [Secretariat, Saifab-l9..Hyderabad.]4One CC to SRI ARVIND [KUMAR KATA, ][Advocate ][OPUC]5iwo CCs to GP FOR SERVICES-Il, [High Court for the State of Telangana, ][at]Hyderabad. [OUT]5iwo CCs to GP FOR SERVICES-Il, [High Court for the State of Telangana, ][at]Hyderabad. [OUT]6Two CD Copies PSK.CJP

0t

HIGH COURT

DATED:3111212024

ORDERWP.No.20751 of 2020

!i:a)r.4/-()Adl'(o2 B tit [zll:5]**oE;r41,;"k-)