Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/21045/2019 of K. Lakshminarayana Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2019
KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI WRIT PETITION No.21045 of 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the proceedings of respondent No.5 dated 13.12.2019, whereunder an amount of Rs.21,222/- is sought to be recovered from the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as
HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
WRIT PETITION No.21045 of 2019
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:
This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the proceedings of respondent No.5 dated 13.12.2019, whereunder an amount of Rs.21,222/- is sought to be recovered from the petitioner.
The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Field Assistant in the year 2007, and was converted as Fixed Tenure Employee vide proceedings dated 07.06.2019; and alleging misappropriation of Rs.21,222/- under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, pursuant to social audit report dated 25.07.2019, the impugned notice was issued seeking refund of the said amount. Hence the writ petition.
Heard the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Smt J.Sumathi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5.
Sri MSR Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4, submits that, based on the social audit report, straight away the impugned notice has been issued; however, the impugned notice ought to have been issued after calling for explanation and completion of disciplinary proceedings initiated but, such procedure has not been followed which is in violation of principles of natural justice.
Learend counsel for the petitioner contends that as per 6.3 of Disciplinary Rules for FTEs, 2012, respondent No.5 has no jurisdiction to impose the penalty, and respondent No.4 is only competent; and none of the provisions contained in 6.2, 6.3 & 6.4 engaged by Society for Rural Development Services (SRDS), disciplinary rules have been followed.
On the short ground that there is violation of principles of natural justice that no opportunity was afforded before issuing impugned notice, the impugned notice dated 13.12.2019 is set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to follow the procedure contemplated under law before initiating any action.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
________________________________
KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J
Date:31.12.2019 Usd