WP/33704/2013 of The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vs S.A. Waheeduddin, on 30 December 2013

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDYAND

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA

WRIT PETITION No.33704 of 2013

Dated: 30.12.2013

Between:

The Government of Andhra Pradesh,rep. by its Chief Engineer,Panchayat Raj Department & another.

And

…..Petitioners

S.A.Waheeduddin & another.

…..Respondents

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDYANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA

WRIT PETITION No.33704 of 2013

ORDER: (Per Justice R. Subhash Reddy)

This writ petition is filed by the respondents inO.A.No.4701 of 2010 filed before the A.P. AdministrativeTribunal, Hyderabad.

1[st] respondent/applicant was an Assistant Engineerin Panchayat Raj Department and he retired from serviceon attaining the age of superannuation. While he was inservice, disciplinary proceedings were initiated andcharges were framed alleging that he committedmisconduct by undertaking fraudulent measurements inexecution of contract works. Most of the charges relate tothe financial year 1993-94. Though charge sheet wasissued in the year 2000, as the inquiry was prolongedwithout any reason, he approached the Tribunal underSection 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 byfiling O.A.No.4701 of 2010. The Tribunal, by recording afinding that there is inordinate delay in completing theinquiry and by relying on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of M.P. Vs. Bani Singh[[1]],Stateof A.P. Vs. N. Radhakishan[[2]], in P.V.Mahadevan Vs.MD.T.N.Housing Board[[3]]and in M.V.Bijlani Vs. Union of India & others[[4]], has allowed the O.A. by quashingthe proceedings initiated against the applicant. As againstthe said order, this writ petition is filed.

As per the directions of the Tribunal issued inO.A.No.4701 of 2010, Government has issued orders inG.O.Rt.No.1846, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development(Vig.IA) Department, dated 14.12.2011, dropping furtheraction against the applicant, but with a further direction towithhold the amount equal to the loss caused to theGovernment, in exercise of power under Sub-Rule (7) ofRule 9 of A.P.Revised Pension Rules, 1980.

On passing such order, complaining violation of thedirections issued by the Tribunal in O.A., respondent No.1again filed contempt application before the Tribunal inC.A.No.1488 of 2011 in O.A.No.4701 of 2010. In theaforesaid contempt application, a further application isfiled in C.M.A.No.271 of 2011. The Tribunal has allowedthe said miscellaneous application with a direction to thepetitioners herein to implement the orders of the Tribunalin O.A.No.4701 of 2010 within a period of four weeks fromthe date of receipt of the said order and ordered forappearance of petitioners herein, if they fail to comply withits directions.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learnedGovernment Pleader appearing for petitioners hasproduced the copy of the orders of Government inG.O.Rt.No.1983, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development(Vig.IA) Department, dated 03.12.2013, by which, thedirection to withhold the amount equal to the loss causedto the Government, as has been ordered videG.O.Rt.No.1846, dated 14.12.2011, is deleted. Para 4 ofG.O.Rt.No.1983, dated 03.12.2013 reads as under :

“4. Government, after careful examination ofthe entire matter, hereby withdraw thefollowing portion of the recovery part inrespect of Sri S.A.Waheeduddin,Asst.Engineer, Panchayat Raj (Retd.)issued in G.O.Rt.No.1846, PR & RD(Vig.IA) Dept., dt.14.12.2011.

“withholding an amount equal tothe loss caused to theGovernment, in this case, from theterminal benefits of the individual,as reported by the Engineer-in-Chief, Panchayat Raj, Hyderabad,as per sub-rule 7 of Rule 9 of A.P.Revised Pension Rules, 1980,issued in G.O.Ms.No.995,Finance (Pension-I) Dept.,dt.21.12.2002.””

It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that asthe petitioners have implemented the orders of theTribunal, they are not pressing for the validity of the orderpassed by the Tribunal per se, and in view of the further

orders passed by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.1983,dated 03.12.2013, the earlier orders issued inG.O.Rt.No.1846, dated 14.12.2011 to the extent ofrecovery portion is also modified. In that view of thematter, directions issued by the Tribunal are implementedand as no argument is advanced on the validity of theorders in O.A.No.4701 of 2010, we do not find any groundto interfere with the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.4701 of2010.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No orderas to costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shallstand closed.

______________________

R. SUBHASH REDDY, J

__________________________

A.SHANKAR

NARAYANA, J

30[th] December 2013

ajr

[1]AIR 1990 SC 1308AIR 1990 SC 1308

[2]1998 (4) SCC 1541998 (4) SCC 154

[3]2005 (6) SCC 6362005 (6) SCC 636

[4]2006 (5) SCC 882006 (5) SCC 88