Case details

Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Decided: 15 September 2000
Case number: 65 of 2001
Type: Judgment (DISMISSED)

Actions & My Vault

Save to My Vault

Ask Compass

Court copy / source

CNR: APHC010011662001 (search it on the eCourts High Court services website (CNR Number tab))

Andhra Pradesh High Court

CIVIL APPEAL 65 of 2001 on 15 September 2000

Cites 0, Cited by 0

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFANDHRAPRADESHATAMARAVATI

TUESDAY,THEELEVENTHDAYOFAPRILTWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYTWO

PRESENTHONOURABLESRIJUSTICESUBBAREDDYSATTI

APPEALSUITNo:65of2001

IBl■■

AppealfiledunderSection96ofCPCpreferredagainstthejudgment&decreedated15/09/2000passedinOSNo.122/1992onthefileofthePrincipalSeniorCivilJudge,Srikakulam.

Between:MathaSuryaRao,S/olateRamamurthy,aged63years,Hindu,Retd-DivisionalForestOfficerR/oH.No.2-12-8,VenkataNagar,KakinadaTown,KakinadaMandal,EastGodavariDistrict

...APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF

AND

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

Decisions referred to

In this index

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. S.K.Da^,SonofNotKnown,agedabout40years.NowworkingasManagingDirectorA.P.ForestDevelopmentCorporation,Hyderabad.DirectorA.P.ForestDevelopmentCorporation,Hyderabad.

2. K.KesavaReddy,SonofNotKnown,agedabout58years,Hindu,PrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,NowRetdFromService,C/oPrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,AryanBhavan,Saifabad,Hyderabad.ChiefConservatorofForests,NowRetdFromService,C/oPrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,AryanBhavan,Saifabad,Hyderabad.

3. B.VarahalaRaju,S/oNotKnown,agedabout54years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerYelamanchili,NowRetdfromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,ConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.OfficerYelamanchili,NowRetdfromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,ConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.

4. P.RamachandraRaju,S/dNotKnownagedabout52years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerSrikakulamTown,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficerSrikakulamTown,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.5.M.SitapathiRao,$/oNotKnown,agedabout38years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerP'edabiluC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.OfficerP'edabiluC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.6.M.AdinarayanaMuthy,Sonofnotknown,agedabout53years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerPalakondaMandal,NowRetd,fromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficerPalakondaMandal,NowRetd,fromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.7.K.NarayanaMurthy,Sonofnotknown,agedabout56years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficer,Nowretiredfromservice,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficer,Nowretiredfromservice,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.8.StateofAndhraPradeshRepresentedbyitsCollector,SrikakulamDistrict.

...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS

(RR2to7aredismissedfordefaultvideCourtOrderdated08/02/2011)

CounselfortheAppellant:SRINVIJAY

CounselfortheRespondents:GPFORAPPEALS

TheCourtmadethefollowing:-

THEHON’BLESRIJUSTICESUBBAREDDYSATTI

APPEALSUITNo.65of2001

JUDGMENT;

Theappellantisplaintiffinthesuit.SuitO.S.No.122of1992wasfiledagainsttherespondentshereinfor.recoveryofRs.3,06,000/-towardscompensationwithinterest@18%p.a.etc.

2. Forthesakeofconvenience,partiestothisappealarereferredtoastheywerearrayedinsuit.referredtoastheywerearrayedinsuit.

3. Thedisputeasallegedintheplaint,inbrief,isthatplaintiffworkedasDivisionalRorestOfficer(DFO),Srikakulamfrom07.11.1987to22.06.1988.The1stdefendantwasConservatorofForests,Visakhapatnam.Visakhapatnam,SrikakulamandVizianagaramareunderthecontrolof1stdefendant.Defendants3to7workedasForestRangeOfficersplaintiffworkedasDivisionalRorestOfficer(DFO),Srikakulamfrom07.11.1987to22.06.1988.The1stdefendantwasConservatorofForests,Visakhapatnam.Visakhapatnam,SrikakulamandVizianagaramareunderthecontrolof1stdefendant.Defendants3to7workedasForestRangeOfficersinseveralrangesinSrikakulamDivisionandtheyaresubordinatesofplaintiff.Plaintifffurtherallegedthatsincehehasbeendischarginghisdutiesinaccordancewithlaw.defendants3to7,beingsubordinates,whowereindulginginfinancialirregularities,sentapetitionagainsttheplaintifftothehigherofficialswithfalseallegations.Basingonthesaidpetition,1stdefendantenquiredintoandinturnsentareporttotheChiefConservatorofForests,Hyderabad.Afterthoroughenquiry,thePrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,framedchargeson11.06.1988-Ex.X-45,viz..subordinatesofplaintiff.Plaintifffurtherallegedthatsincehehasbeendischarginghisdutiesinaccordancewithlaw.defendants3to7,beingsubordinates,whowereindulginginfinancialirregularities,sentapetitionagainsttheplaintifftothehigherofficialswithfalseallegations.Basingonthesaidpetition,1stdefendantenquiredintoandinturnsentareporttotheChiefConservatorofForests,Hyderabad.Afterthoroughenquiry,thePrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,framedchargeson11.06.1988-Ex.X-45,viz..

(1) FinancialirregularitiesinpurchasesmadeinSocialForestryDivision,SrikakulamandrushofexpenditureinFebruary/March,1988;

(2) ViolationofconductRulesandindisciplinebymakingpressreportshurlingallegationsagainstthesuperiorofficersascorrupt;and

(3) ExtractionofmoneyfromtheRangeOfficersandtakingbribesfromthem,amountingtocorruption.bribesfromthem,amountingtocorruption.

was

Thedefendeint,thethenConservatorofForests,wasappointedasenquiryofficerandanenquirywasconductedagainsttheplaintiffbyLokAyukthaandAnti-CorruptionBureau.The2"ddefendantbeingenquiryofficer,recordedfindingthatfinancialirregularitiesarepartiallyproved;thatviolationofconductrulesandindisciplineisproved;thatinrespectofextractionofmoney,theenquiryofficerheldthatnodirectevidenceisavailabletoestablishthesame.However,plaintiffwaskeptUndersuspensionon20.06-1988,whichcameintoeffectfrom22.06.1988.

ThePrincipalConservatorofForests,acceptedthefindingsoftheenquiryofficerandrecommendedtotheGovernmenttoimposepensioncutofRs.100/-totheplaintiff,sincehewasretiredfromservicewitheffectfrom30.06.1988.Accordingly,theGovernmentofAndhraPradeshissuedG.O.Rt.No.798dated24.10.1991,Ex.X-55acceptingtherecommendationsof!•*defendant.

AfterissuanceofEx.X-55,theplaintiffgotissuedalegal noticetodefendantsclaimingdamagesallegingthatdueto diseiplinaiyenquiry,hewassuspendedandtherewasdelayinsettlementofterminalbenefits.HefurtherallegedthatallincidentshadtaJkenplacebecauseoffalseaccusationofcorruptionmadeagainsthimbydefendants2to7andbasingonthereportsentbytheConservatorofForests,the1stdefendantandprejudicialenquiryconductedby2"^defendant.Thus,hefiledthesuitforthereliefsstatedsupra.

4. The1stdefendantfiledwrittenstatementanddeniedtheallegationsmadeintheplaint.Itwascontendedinteralia.thathedischargedhisduties,beingGovernmentofficialandpointedoutvariousirregularitiescommittedbytheplaintiff.allegationsmadeintheplaint.Itwascontendedinteralia.thathedischargedhisduties,beingGovernmentofficialandpointedoutvariousirregularitiescommittedbytheplaintiff.

5. The2"‘idefendanthiedseparatewrittenstatementandcontendedthatheconductedenquiryaspertheprocedureinvokedandsubmittedreport.contendedthatheconductedenquiryaspertheprocedureinvokedandsubmittedreport.

6. Defendants3to7filedseparatewrittenstatementanddeniedtheallegationsmadeintheplaint.deniedtheallegationsmadeintheplaint.

7. Duringthecourseoftrial,plaintiffexaminedhimselfasP.W.1andExs.A-1toA-18weremarked.Onbehalfofdefendants.1stdefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.l,3tddefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.2,4thdefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.6andD.Ws.3to5and7wereexamined.Exs.B-1toB-3weremarked.Exs.X-1toX-62werealsomarked.P.W.1andExs.A-1toA-18weremarked.Onbehalfofdefendants.1stdefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.l,3tddefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.2,4thdefendantexaminedhimselfasD.W.6andD.Ws.3to5and7wereexamined.Exs.B-1toB-3weremarked.Exs.X-1toX-62werealsomarked.

6. The<tri^Courtdismissedthesuitind&judgmentdated15.09.2000.Aggrievedbythesame,theaboveappealwasfiled.15.09.2000.Aggrievedbythesame,theaboveappealwasfiled.

9. Theappealwasdismissedfordefaultagainstdefendants2to7byorderdated08.02.2011.Noapplicationwasfiledseekingrestorationofappealagainstthedefendants2to7.to7byorderdated08.02.2011.Noapplicationwasfiledseekingrestorationofappealagainstthedefendants2to7.

10. HeardSriN.Vijay,learnedcounselforappellant.

11. Learnedcounselfortheappellantwouldcontendthattheenquiryconductedby2"^defendantisnotinaccordancewithlawandthepetitionsentbydefendants3to7againsttheplaintiffiswithfalseallegationstoharasstheplaintiffatthefagendofhiscareer.Thoughnecessarydocumentsweresuppliedtotheenquiryofficer,theywerenptproperlyconsideredbyhim.Hewouldfurthercontendthatby.Ex.X-55,theGovernmentissuedG.O.Ms.No.798dated24.10.1991andorderedthatfurtheractionagainsttheplaintiffbedropped,assuchtheplaintiffisentitledfordamages.enquiryconductedby2"^defendantisnotinaccordancewithlawandthepetitionsentbydefendants3to7againsttheplaintiffiswithfalseallegationstoharasstheplaintiffatthefagendofhiscareer.Thoughnecessarydocumentsweresuppliedtotheenquiryofficer,theywerenptproperlyconsideredbyhim.Hewouldfurthercontendthatby.Ex.X-55,theGovernmentissuedG.O.Ms.No.798dated24.10.1991andorderedthatfurtheractionagainsttheplaintiffbedropped,assuchtheplaintiffisentitledfordamages.

12. Inthelightofpleadings,evidenceonrecordandargumentsadvanced,followingpointsariseforconsideration.argumentsadvanced,followingpointsariseforconsideration.

(1) Whethertheappellantprovedmalafxdesagainstthe2“^defendantqua.enquiry?againstthe2“^defendantqua.enquiry?

(2) Whether.theappellantprovedmalafidesagainstalltherespondentsan4henceheisagainstalltherespondentsan4henceheis entitledforclaimingcompensation?

(3) Towhatrelief?

13. Sincetheabovethreepointsareinter-connected,thisCourtdeemsitappropriatetodealwiththesamesimultaneously.Courtdeemsitappropriatetodealwiththesamesimultaneously.

14. Aperusaloftheplaintindicatesthatsuitwasfiledforrecoveryofdamagesagainstthedefendants.AccordingtotheplaintiffhesufferedphysicallyandmentallyinviewofsuspensionfromtheserviceandconsequentialproceedingsculminatingintoissuanceofEx.X-55.Thoughtheappellantcontendedthat2"^defendant/2"‘irespondentconductedenquiry malafidelywithoutfollowingtheprocedure,nocogentmaterialwasplacedbeforetheCourttosubstantiatethesaidcontention.Infact,aperusalofEx.X-55indicatesthatsincetheplaintiffwasretiredfromservice,pensioncutofRs.100/-wasimposedaspenalty.Infact,intheenquiryreportsubmittedbythe2"^respondent,findingwithregardtoirregularitiescommittedbytheplaihtiff,wasacceptedbytheGovernment.Enquiryreport wasnotsetaside.

15. Therespondent,beingtheenquiryofficer,followedtheprocedureandsubmittedthereporttotheGovernmentforconsideration.The2"^respondentdischargedhisdutiesbeingenquiryofficer.Plaintiffcouldnotprovethat2"‘*respondentprocedureandsubmittedthereporttotheGovernmentforconsideration.The2"^respondentdischargedhisdutiesbeingenquiryofficer.Plaintiffcouldnotprovethat2"‘*respondent actedindeviationofhisduties.Evenaperusalofdocumentsandevidencemanifestthat2^^respondentdulyfollowedtheprocedureandconducedenquiryandfinallysubmittedreport.IntheabsenceOfanymaterialquamaliceagainst2"^respondent,thisCourtisnotinclinedtoacceptthecontentionoftheappellantthatthe2’^'^respondent-enquiryofficeractedmalafidelyandsubmittedthereportagainsttheappellant.

16. Aperusaloftheevidenceanddocumentsshowsthattheappellantfailedtoprovethatallthedefendantsactedmalafidelyagainsthim,exceptmakingbaldallegations,withoutsubstantiatingthesame.Aspointedoutsupra,Ex.X-55issuedbytheGovernmentindicatesthat,theappellantqommittedirregularitieeandsincetheappellant/plaintiffretiredfromservice.epensioncutofRs.100/-wasimposedaspenalty.Unlessanduntil,Ex.X-55issuedbytheGovernmentissetaside,theplaintiffisnotentitledtpanyreliefagainstthe defendants.Apartfromthat,theappealagainsttherespondents2to7wasdismissedfordefaulton08.02.2011.

17. Viewedfromanyangle,theappellantisnotentitledtocompensationandthustheappealisliabletobedismissed.

18. Accordingly,theappealsuitisdismissed,However,noorderastocosts.orderastocosts.

Asasequel,allthependingmiscellaneousapplicationsshallstandclosed.

Sd/-EKAMESWARARAODEPUTYREGISTRAR/^^^ySECTIONOFFICER

//TRUECOPY//

To,

1. CivilJudge,Srikakulam.

2. OneceVoSriNVijayAdvocate[OPUC]

3. TwoCCstoGPforAppeals[OUT]

CoMrtofAndhraPradeshatAmaravati.

HIGHCOURT

DATED:11/04/2022

JUDGMENT+DECREE

AS.No.65of2001

DISMISSINGTHEA.S

OFANbwJ^SSwX11SEP2023CurrentSection"IlI*1■■'

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFANDHRAPRADESHATAMARAVATI<^

TUESDAY,THEELEVENTHDAYOFAPRILTWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYTWO

PRESENT

HONOURABLESRIJUSTICESUBBAREDDYSATTIAPPEALSUITNo:65of2001

Between:MathaSuryaRao,S/olateRamamurthy,aged63years,Hindu,Retd.DivisionalForestOfficerR/oH.No.2-12-8,VenkataNagar,KakinadaTown,KakinadaMandal,EastGodavariDistrict

...APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF

AND

1S.K.Das,SonofNotKnown,agedabout40years.NowworkingasManagingDirectorA.P.ForestDevelopmentCorporation,Hyderabad.DirectorA.P.ForestDevelopmentCorporation,Hyderabad.2K.KesavaReddy,SonofNotKnown,agedabout58years,Hindu,PrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,NowRetd.FromService,C/oPrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,AryanBhavan,Saifabad,Hyderabad.ChiefConservatorofForests,NowRetd.FromService,C/oPrincipalChiefConservatorofForests,AryanBhavan,Saifabad,Hyderabad.3B.VarahalaRaju,S/oNotKnown,agedabout54years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerYelamanchili,NowRetdfromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,ConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.OfficerYelamanchili,NowRetdfromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,ConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.4P.RamachandraRaju,S/oNotKnownagedabout52years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerSrikakulamTown,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficerSrikakulamTown,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.5M.SitapathiRao,S/oNotKnown,agedabout38years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerPedabiluC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.OfficerPedabiluC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.6M.AdinarayanaMuthy,Sonofnotknown,agedabout53years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficerPalakondaMandal,NowRetd,fromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficerPalakondaMandal,NowRetd,fromserviceC/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.7K.NarayanaMurthy,Sonofnotknown,agedabout56years,Hindu,ForestRangeOfficer,Nowretiredfromservice,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.RangeOfficer,Nowretiredfromservice,C/oConservatorofForests,SoilConservationCircle,Visakhapatnam.8StateofAndhraPradeshRepresentedbyitsCollector,SrikakulamDistrict.

...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS

(RR2to7aredismissedfordefaultvideCourtOrderdated08/02/2011)AppealfiledunderSection96ofCPCpreferredagainstthejudgment&decreedated15/09/2000passedinOSNo.122/1992onthefileofthePrincipalSeniorCivilJudge,Srikakulam.

Thisappealcomingonforhearinganduponperusingthegroundsofappeal,thejudgmentoftheLowerCourtandmaterialpapersintheSuitanduponhearingargumentsofSriNVijay,AdvocatefortheAppellantandGPforAppealsforRespondents.

ThisCourtdothOrderanddecreeasfollows:1.ThattheAppealSuitbeandisherebydismissed.2.Thatthereshallbenoorderastocostsinthisappeal Sd/-EKAMESWARARAODEPUTYREGISTRAR//TRUECOPY//ECTfONOFFICER

To,1.ThePrincipalSeniorCivilJudge,Srikakulam.2.TwoCDCopiesvna HIGHCOURT

DATED:11/04/2022

DECREEAS.No.65of2001

DISMISSINGTHEA.S

a:11SEP2023,ogCurrentSection.