STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. Y.V.RAMANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions are filed challenging the common order, dated 25.03.2009, through which, O.A.Nos.10623 and 10788 of 2008 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (for short 'the Tribunal'), were allowed.

(2.) The individual respondents (for short 'the respondents') are working as Town Planning Supervisors in Visakhapatnam and Madanapalli Municipalities, respectively. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against them by the Director of Town and Country Planning, Hyderabad, the 2nd petitioner herein, alleging certain irregularities. After conducting the disciplinary enquiry, the 2nd petitioner passed orders, dated 02.02.2008, imposing the punishment of stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect. The appeals preferred by the respondents before the 1st petitioner herein, were dismissed through orders, dated 05.06.2008. Thereupon, the respondents filed O.A.Nos.10623 and 10788 of 2008 before the Tribunal. The said O.As. were allowed by the Tribunal through common order, dated 25.03.2009, following the order, dated 16.10.2008, passed by it in O.A.Nos.7912 and 7889 of 2008. Hence, these two writ petitions.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader submits that the facts of the case in O.A.No.7912 of 2008 are substantially different from those in the present cases and that the Tribunal has mechanically allowed the O.As. filed by the respondents. He contends that the issue that fell for consideration in O.A.No.7912 of 2008 was as to whether a disciplinary authority can straight away differ with the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer, and in the instant cases, show cause notices were issued by the 2nd petitioner before he differed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. According to him, the procedure prescribed under law and in particular Rule 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, was strictly followed.