M R RAMANUJAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed for issue of a writ, particularly in the nature of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records relating to the order of the 3rd respondent dated 7-3-1980 removing the petitioner from service of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams as also the order of the 2nd respondent dated 20-10-1980 and the order of the 1st respondent dated 9-11-1981 dismissing the appeal and revision petition preferred by him questioning the order of removal passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and direct reinstatement of the petitioner into the service of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams with all the consequential benefits.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a lower Division Clerk in the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam service on 6-2-1962 by the Executive Officer of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams. He was promoted as an Upper Division Clerk'on 8-2-1969 by the Executive Officer. On 8-8-1979 he was served with a memo by the Joint Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, the 3rd respondent herein levelling two charges against him and calling upon him to submit his explanation in connection therewith. The first charge was that he failed to handover charge of his office and the keys of the almyrah entrusted to him, to his successor in the office of the Assistant Engineer- II. soon after his relief on 6-2-1979 and that he handed over charge of his office partially only on 30-6-1979 after a lapse of five months. The second charge was that he did not handover to his successor six items of records. On 25-9-1979 the petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges levelled against him. Without holding any enquiry into the charges, the Joint Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams by his order dated 29-10-1979 held that the charges were proved and provisionally concluded that he should be removed from service. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Executive Officer impugning the provisional order of removal passed by the Joint Executive Officer as being in contravention of mandatory provisions relating to domestic enquiries and in violation of principles of natural justice and demanding an oral enquiry into the charges. The Executive Officer appointed the Deputy Executive Officer (Services) as the Enquiry Officer to conduct the enquiry. During the enquiry a third charge was framed against the petitioner alleging mis-appropriation of certain amounts, on his part, collected towards water and sanitory charges. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 2.2.1980 refuting all the three charges. Enquiry into the charges was concluded by the Deputy Executive Officer on 29-2-1980 and a report was submitted to the Joint Executive Officer on 4-3-1980. On receipt of the report, the Joint Executive Officer by his proceedings dated 7-3-1980 confirmed the provisional order of removal of the petitioner from service holding that all the charges were proved and directed his removal from service with immediate effect. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Management Committee, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, the 2nd respondent, under Section 32 of the Trumala Trupati Devasthanams Act, 1979 questioning the order of removal. The appeal was dismissed on 20-10-1980. The petitioner unsuccessfully moved the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent, assailing both the orders, by way of Revision Petition.

(3.) It is urged on behelf of the petitioner that the enquiry conducted by the Deputy Executive Officer (Services) was vitiated, in that he was denied resaonable opportunity to defend himself, that some of the witnesses cited in support of the charges were examined in his absence while some of the witnesses summoned on his behalf were not examined without assigning any special reasons for dispensing with their examinaation, that he was not even given an opportunity to file a written statement of his defence nor was he given a personal hearing after completion of the oral enquiry, that a copy of the report of the Enquiry Officer was not even furnished to him, that no explanation whatsoever was even called from him before infliction of the punishment of removal on him, that the impugned order of removal is in flagrant violation of the provisions of Rule 19 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1963 made applicable to the employees of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanamas and that in any event the order of removal passed by the Joint Executive Officer not being the appointing authority is illegal as being violative of Art. 311 (1) of the Constitution of India.