K SATTI BABU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the proceedings issued by the 4th respondent in C.No.4939/H1/214, dated 16.03.2017 and consequential memo issued in RC.No.137/HGs-Esst/2017-2, dated 06.02.2020 of the 2nd respondent.

(2.) Heard Sri A. Sridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner entered into the service of the Home Guards Organization vide proceedings of the 4th respondent, dated 21.06.2012 in DO No.697/2012, C.No.303/H1/2012 and his service was regularized as driver and he is discharging his duties to the satisfaction of the superiors without any complaints. He further contends that the 4th respondent issued show-cause notice in C.No.4939/H1/2014, dated 08.01.2015 calling for the explanation of the petitioner alleging that while he was discharging duties as driver of III Town Police Station (Beat Mobile) absented from duties from 01.11.2014 onwards without permission from the superiors and not responding to the memos and further alleging that one B. Narsinga Rao gave complaint against the petitioner that the petitioner married his daughter Kumari on 08.06.2014 with dowry and she left her house and committed suicide by hanging for which a Crime No.179/2014 registered under Section 304(B) and 498(A) of IPC and also under Dowry and Prohibition Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted his detailed explanation on 20.02.2015. After receipt of the explanation, no enquiry has been conducted and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner for hearing or to produce any evidence to substantiate his case, passed orders, dated 16.03.2017 removing the petitioner from the roles of Home Guards Organization. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad by filing O.A.No.1345/17 and the said O.A. was dismissed, since, it is a matter to be considered and dealt with by the Appellate Authority. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent and the said appeal was rejected by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings in RC.No.137/HGs-Estt/2017-2, dated 06.02.2020.