WP/9445/2022 of Smt. A. Kamala Devi Vs The State of Telangana on 5 October 2026

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Maldamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in not considering the representations dated 19.06.2017 and, 25.07.2017 of the petitioner seeking retirement benefits i.e., P.F., gratuity, pensionary benefits of her deceased husband as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 21 of the fundamental rights as qfraranteed under the Constitution of India and consequently to direct respondent No.2 to pass orders on the reptesentation of the petitioner seeking retirement benef,rts i.e., p.F., gratuit5r, pensionar5z benefits to the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the hling of the present writ petition are that the petitioner's husband Late A.V.Ranga Rao joined- as a Lower Division Clerk in the office of Director of Technical Education on 31.O7.1965 and was !

,e TMD.J ur.P.No.9445 of 2022 promoted as a Upper Division Clerk on 16.01.1972. While the petitioner's husband was working as such, he was placed under suspension in the year 1978 on the allegation of theft of typewritten memorandum of marks book on the night of 04.12.1977 and fraudulent use of the sanre. He was sanctioned subsistence allowance upto 1978. Thereafter, the petitioner's husbald was dismissed from service by respondent No.2 uide dismissal order dated

12. O7 .2018 w.r.e.f. 30.09. 1991. However, there was mention of the retirement benefits or any other ber:Lefits in the dismissal order. The date of pirth of the petitioner's husbald is 18.O7.1943 and the date of superannuation would be 31.07.2001. It is further stated that no orders, permitting him to retire from the government service on attaining the age of superannuation, are found 1.o have been issued in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner seeks pension to her husband, who was under suspension since t6.ol .r978.

3. It is also submitted that the suspension of the petitioner's husband was reviewed from time to tirrre and I

TIV4J W.P.No.9445 oJ 2022 was extended and in the meantime, a criminal case was also booked against the petitioner,s husband and the Criminal Court convicted the accused for the alleged offences uirle order dated 30.09. 1991. lt is further submitted that though the respondents have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner,s husband and issued a charge memo, they tailed to take any further action against him. petitioner,s iusbana expired on

19. O2.2O73 and subsequently, the petitioner herein being the wife of late A.V.Ranga Rao, filed a representation before Lok Ada_lat, Legal Services Aufority on 22.11.2OI3 requesting for sanction of pensionary benehts from the Department of Technical Education for the total service rendered by the petitioner,s husband including the suspension period. ThereaJter, the respondents passed the dismissal order dated l2.OZ.2}lg dismissing the petitioner's husband from service w.r.e.f.3O.09.1991. Therefore, the present writ petition has been f,rled seeking a direction to the respondents to consider her representations ald grant the retirement benefits to

TMD,J W.P.No-9445 oJ 2022 petitioner's husband including family pen sion to the petitioner on account of service rendered by her husband'

4. The respondents have filed a counter eLffidavit admitting that ti1l 2O 18, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner's husband \ rere not concluded. It is stated in the counter affidavit that since the Criminal Court convicted the petitioner's husband for the atleged offences, there was no option but to dismiss the petitioner's husband from service and accordingll', order dated 12.O7.2}la has been issued dismissirrg the petitioner's husband from serviJe w.r.e.f. the 'late of conviction i.e., 30.09. 199 1.

5. Having regard to the rival contention and the material available on record, this Court finds that admittedly the petitioner's husband has been placed under susper: sion on the allegation of theft of typewritten memoran,fum of marks and misuse of the same and has also been convicted for the said offence by the criminal coutt uide ordr:r dated 30.09.1991 and therefore, the respondents passed the gigpissal order dated 12.07 .2078 w.r.e.f. 30.09. 1991.

r_' .rtfrg 'T'// I

l') TUID,J W.P.No.9.l45 oJ 2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed relialce upon several judgments to the effect that after the death of the employee, the disciplinar5r proceedings would be abated and therefore, the order of dismissal could not have been passed subsequent to death of the petitioner,s husband in the year 2013. The respondents have also not denied the fact that the disciplinaqr proceedings. were not concluded during the lifetime of the employee. However,. the petitioner is not challenging the said dismissal ordi:r dated l2.O7.2OlB, but she is only seeking pension and other retirement benefits by duly takinq into consideration the length of service rendered by her husbald including the suspension period. This Court finds that even if the date of dismissal would be taken as 30.09. 1991, the petitioner,s husband would have put in nearly 26 years of service. However, in view of the order of dismissal, the employee would entail forfeiture of his past service and therefore would not be entitled to any benefits including pension and pensionar5r benefits, gratuity and also for encashment of leave. .- - t I ( ( f t

TMD,J w.P.No.!r445 oJ 2022

6. This Writ Petition is dismissed. There shal.. be no order as to costs.

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in ttLis Writ Petition, shall stand closed \ SD/- C.PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSTSTANT RFGljirf,AR seclor)6rrrcen //TRUE COPY// To, { '1 . One CC to SRI C.VIKRAIVI CHANDRA, Advocate [OPUC]

2. fwo CCs to GP FOR SERVICES, High Court for the State cf Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

3. Two CD Copies g i

tt 4, HIGH COURT DATED: 0310512024 f sTetr rt1 n r .rlll 2[l2l u I err R ( + -) ,.) ( *ft,

ORDER

WP.No.9445 of 2022 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS

-k t OE ff r0, s rr,.\. r e, II (qYq b(9 .^\e