LAWS(APH)-2023-1-109

TIRUMALLA DURGA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Decided On January 24, 2023
Tirumalla Durga Rao Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The claim of the petitioner is that initially he was appointed as Library Assistant in Panchayat Raj Department in the year 1968 and since then he has been discharging his duties to the utmost satisfaction of the superiors, and also, he has been transferred to various places. It is further stated that he was entrusted with the work of establishment Sec. and he is no way concerned with the education Sec. . Thereafter, in the year 1997, he was deputed to the education Sec. . After completion of one year of service, a news item was published in daily news paper alleging that certain candidates obtained bogus appointment orders. Basing on that the 2nd respondent has issued proceedings dtd. 2/9/1998 suspended the petitioner from service along with other employees. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent has issued Charge Memo vide Memo No.345/B-1/98 dtd. 27/9/1998. Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted his detailed explanation dtd. 5/10/1999 to the 3rd respondent. Without considering explanation, the petitioner was issued suspension orders and thereafter a criminal case was also lodged against him with some employees vide CC No.110/2000 on the file of JFCM, Kovvur and the same was ended with acquittal. Surprisingly, the 2nd respondent had issued another charge memo vide Rc.No.H3-8906/98, dtd. 7/5/2001. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted his explanation.

(3.) The counter affidavits have been filed by the 1st and 2nd respondents denying all the allegations made in the petition and mainly contended that the Government after examining the material on record had decided to take further action as per A.P. Revised Pension Rules 1980 (for short "the Rules") to impose penalty of withholding pension and gratuity in full and permanently against the petitioner as the charges held proved against the petitioner. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Rule 9 of the Rules vide Govt Memo No.3531/Vig.IV/A1/2004-24, dtd. 5/3/2010. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted his explanation dtd. 27/3/2010 requesting to drop further action against the petitioner stating that he was acquitted from penal case in CC No.110/2000. The petitioner also submitted that the criminal charges and the charges framed by the Government are one and same, he had acquitted from the criminal charges, as such, he had not committed any offence and requested to drop the charges. After examining the explanation of the petitioner, the Government had decided to impose the penalty of withholding Pension and gratuity in fully and permanently against the petitioner under Rule 9 of the Rules. Thereafter, the APPSC have given their concurrence for imposing the proposed penalty against the petitioner through Lr.No.77/Rt/3/2011, dtd. 14/11/2011. It is also stated that the Government in G.O.Rt.No.266, PR&RD (Vig.III) Department, dtd. 13/3/2015 have issued orders imposing the penalty of withholding of pension and gratuity in full shape and permanently against the petitioner herein under Rule 9 of the Rules. Hence, the punishment imposed against the petitioner is just and proper and in accordance with the provisions laid down under Rule 9 of the Rules.