GUNUPUDI RAMU Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent has transferred and posted him as Assistant Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sec. , Undi, and joined on 27/7/2019. While the petitioner was working in that post, a news item was published on 17/3/2022 against the petitioner in Andhra Jyothi alleging that he made certain adverse comments against the farmers without asking him to release irrigation water. Providing irrigation water to the farmers is the main duty of the Village Panchayat Secretary, Cherukuwada, therefore, the petitioner addressed a letter to the Village Panchayat Secretary on 17/3/2022 requesting him to release water to the farmers. Subsequently, the 1st respondent, vide Memo dtd. 19/3/2022 requested the Executive Engineer to submit a detailed report with regard to the news item published in the Andhra Jyothi. Meanwhile, the petitioner has explained to the concerned authorities about the farmers' agitation demanding to provide irrigation water and stated that there is no any fault on his part as far as the issue is concerned. However, the 1st respondent has issued proceedings dtd. 25/3/2022 calling explanation on the same subject stating that the 3rd respondent submitted enquiry report against the petitioner alleging that duties assigned to him as a Sec. Officer in the Mandal are not being discharged properly and the lethargic attitude towards discharging duties attracts the initiation of disciplinary action against the petitioner as per the CCA Rules. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 30/3/2022. Being not satisfied with the same, the 1st respondent issued the impugned memo dtd. 11/4/2022 surrendering the petitioner to the 2nd respondent. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent who is supposed to reject the order of surrender issued by the 1st respondent, mechanically without any application of mind, issued the further impugned proceedings dtd. 28/4/2022 issuing reposting order, even though the 1st respondent is not having any authority and jurisdiction to issue the impugned order of surrender dtd. 11/4/2022. Questioning the impugned orders, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

(3.) Counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent denying all the allegations made in the petition and contended that the AEE post is Sec. level field officer post in Water Resources Department. The main duty of the AEE is providing water to the ayacut under his jurisdiction duly monitoring the water regulation with his subordinate staff. So, he is the competent authority to release the water in canals/channels as per the directions/instructions of the higher authorities from time to time. Hence the contention of the petitioner to address letter to Panchayat Secretary for releasing water is not acceptable. Based on the enquiry report submitted by the E.E himself, the Superintending Engineer has surrendered the services of the petitioner to the Head of the Department pending initiation of disciplinary action against the petitioner instead of issuing suspension orders to the petitioner as per Rule 13 point 4(i) of CCA Rules and the G.O. The Superintending Engineer and the Executive Engineer are competent to take disciplinary action against the AEE for his dereliction of duties. Instead of issuing suspension orders as per Rule 13 point 4(i) of CCA Rules, the Superintending Engineer has only surrendered the services of the AEE to the Engineer-in- Chief, Administration.