GOVERNMENT OF A P Vs. N RAMANAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the Government of Andhra Pradesh has been filed challenging the final judgment and order dated 28.04.2003 of the High Court of judicature of Andhra Pradesh passed in Writ Petition No. 2121/03 whereby the High Court allowed the Writ Petition filed by the respondent herein. The High Court by the impugned order quashed the order dated 17.04.2001 passed by the appellant dismissing the respondent from service.

(2.) Relevant facts leading to filing of this appeal by the State may briefly be stated as under:

(3.) The respondent herein was initially appointed as Over- Seer in the year 1966 which post was re-designated as Assistant Engineer in the year 1974. He was in-charge of Bitumen stores between May 1990 and September 1994 while working as the Assistant Engineer in R&B Department, Karim Nagar District, Andhra Pradesh. It was brought to the notice of the appellant that the respondent while working at the said place misappropriated huge quantities of 425 MT of bulk bitumen and 71.00 MT of pack bitumen. The Engineer- in-chief (R&B) Administration, was accordingly directed by the Government to frame appropriate charges against the respondent and others involved in the misappropriation under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of A.P.Civil Services (CC & A) Rules, 1991 (herein referred to as the Rules ) against the respondent and others concerned. The Engineer-in-chief accordingly framed articles of charges as against the respondent. The Government issued orders appointing a Member of Commissionerate of Inquiries as the Enquiry Officer to conduct departmental enquiry against the respondent and others for the irregularities of large scale misappropriation of bitumen belonging to Government valued at about more than Rs. Forty Lakhs. The respondent was placed under suspension by the order dated 13.08.1998. The Enquiry Officer after making an enquiry as is required in law has submitted his report in which it is held that the respondent who was incharge of stores has not been able to properly account for missing quantities of bitumen and accordingly held that the charges have been duly proved against him.