P GOPALAIAH Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the orders dated 12.09.2006 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 6548 of 2001 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the respondents to give notional promotion as Superintending Engineer to the petitioner with retrospective effect i.e. 01.7.1987 with all consequential benefits such as pay fixation, arrears and pension etc.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer (now designated as Assistant Executive Engineer) in the year 1956, subsequently, he was promoted as Assistant Engineer (now designated as Deputy Executive Engineer) and then he was promoted as Executive Engineer through G.O. Ms. No. 73, I & CAD Department, dated 22.9.1977. As per seniority in the category of Executive Engineer, he was due for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer in the year 1987. There were several vacancies of Superintending Engineers at that time. But the authorities had not filled up the posts and all the vacancies of Superintending Engineers were kept vacant. The Executive Engineers were placed on Full Additional Charge of Superintending Engineers. The petitioner was given full Additional Charge of Superintending Engineer in the month of January,1990 and he was continued till his superannuation on 31.7.1990. Thereafter, the first respondent issued G.O. Rt. No. 296, 1 & CAD Department, dated 11.04.1991 initiating disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and another for the irregularities said to have been committed by him relating to appointments of N.M.R(Nominal Muster Roll) workers and promotion of Attenders as Record Assistants while he was working as Superintending Engineer on Full Additional Charge. The Commissioner of Enquiries was appointed as Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry and he gave his report holding that none of the charges framed against them are proved. But, the first respondent did not accept the enquiry report and issued show cause notice proposing to penalise the petitioner by deducting Rs. 10/- per month from his pension and finally issued G.O. Ms. No. 38, 1 & CAD, dated 23.03.1996 deducting Rs. 10/- per month from the pension of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred a revision to the first respondent but no orders were passed.

(3.) The Government has constituted Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) on 10.12.1993 for promotions to the post of Superintending Engineers, wherein petitioner's name was also considered, but his name was deferred on the ground that the enquiry ordered in G.O. Rt. No. 296, I & CAD Department, dated 11.04.1991 is pending.