STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. R CH RAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted. Arguments heard.

(2.) The short point involved in this appeal is whether the Conservator of Forests exercising his powers of revision under r. 15a (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1963 was bound to follow the procedure prescribed under r. 19 (2) of the Rules. In this case, the District Forest Officer at the conclusion of a departmental enquiry against the respondent held that the charges were not proved. He therefore exonerated the respondent of the charges levelled against him and directed that the period of suspension shall be treated as on duty. Thereafter, the Conservator of Forests who is the appellate authority issued a notice under r. 31 (1) (a) read with r. l5a (2) of the Rules requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service. In response thereto, the respondent submitted his reply. The conservator of Forests being satisfied on the material on record that the charges were proved, passed an order of dismissal of the respondent from service. The respondent preferred appeals to the Chief Conservator of forests and the State government, but the appeals were dismissed. There after the respondent filed a representation petition before the Andhra Pradesh administrative tribunal. The tribunal by the impugned order while upholding the power of the Conservator of Forests under r. l5a (2) to reopen the case and issue the show cause notice, held that he had no power to pass any order for dismissal without following the procedure prescribed under r. 19 (2) i. e. affording the respondent a fresh opportunity to defend his case.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the tribunal was not right in holding that the Conservator of Forests while exercising his power of revision was bound to follow the procedure under r. 19 (2) and could not impose the punishment of dismissal of the respondent from service on the basis of the evidence recorded by the Enquiry Officer. The provision contained in r. l5a (2) of the Rules is as follows: