DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION HYDERABAD Vs. QUASIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the order dated 23.12.2009 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (for short 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 11663 of 2009, whereby the O.A. filed by the first respondent questioning the removal order dated 31.10.2007 passed by the second petitioner and the order dated 24.09.2009 passed by the first petitioner rejecting the appeal filed by the first respondent, was allowed and the matter was remanded while ordering re-induction of the first respondent into service.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the first respondent was initially appointed as a Sweeper in 1984 in the Osmania General Hospital and was promoted as a Laboratory Attendant in 1995. While working as Laboratory Attendant, on 03.11.1997 he applied for sanction of 90 days earned leave with effect from 10.11.1997 to 07.02.1998 on personal grounds to settle the property dispute at Narsabadda, Sangareddy, Medak District, and on expiry of leave, he did not report to duty nor sought extension of leave and remained unauthorisedly absent. On 04.09.2006 i.e., after nine years of unauthorized absence, he submitted representation to the second petitioner with a request admit him to duty. Then, the second petitioner issued a charge memo dated 05.02.2007 for unauthorized absence, to which the first respondent submitted explanation on 21.03.2007 giving reasons for the absence. Thereafter, the second petitioner issued show cause notice dated 17.04.2007 and consequently by order 31.10.2007 removed the first respondent from service. Aggrieved thereby, the first respondent filed an appeal before the first petitioner, who, in turn, called for a report. In the meanwhile, the first respondent filed O.A. No. 7495 of 2009 seeking a direction to the first petitioner to pass orders on his appeal. By letter dated 18.09.2009, the first petitioner instructed him to appoint an enquiry officer to conduct enquiry against the first respondent and initiate action under the Rules. Accordingly, by proceedings dated 04.10.2009, an enquiry officer was appointed. The first petitioner, by order dated 24.09.2009, rejected the appeal and the Tribunal disposed of the O.A. No. 7495 of 2009 on 07.10.2009. Subsequently, the first respondent filed O.A. No. 11663 of 2009 questioning the removal orders dated 31.10.2007 passed by the second petitioner and the order dated 24.09.2009 passed by the first petitioner rejecting the appeal. According to the petitioners removal order dated 31.10.2007 was passed following the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (for short 'the Rules'), but according to the first respondent, it was passed without conducting enquiry as contemplated under the Rules.

(3.) Heard the Learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record.