K. DESIKACHARYULU NAIDU Vs. GOVT, OF A.P. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE (H), DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) K. Venkataramana Raju, Triune Officer, Ambara Maharajapuram village was dismissed from service on 31-8-1963. Thereafter, the fifth respondent was acting as the Triune officer. He was also removed from service by the Revenue Divisional officer, Chittoor, by an order d/ 18-8-1965. The order was confirmed on appeal by the District Collector on 16-4-1966. A Second appeal was preferred to the Board of Revenue which was also dismissed on 8-10-1966. The fifth respondent preferred a revision petition to the Government which was dismissed on 23-11-1967. As the post fell permanently vacant, the Thasildar, Puttur invited applications for the post. The petitioner and two others applied. Meanwhile the fifth respondent purported to file another revision petition on 9-11-1970 against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 8-10-1966. In view of the pendency of this revision petition the Revenue Divisional Officer by his order dated 9-10-1971 appointed the petitioner temporarily as the Triune officer for a period of two years or till the receipt of orders of the Government on the revision petition filed by the fifth respondent which ever is earlier, subject to the condition that he should pass Headman's test part II and Karnam's test part II within two years from the date of his joining the post failing which he will be discharged from service. The petitioner joined duty in pursuance of this order add passed the prescribed tests. An appeal by one of the applicants who had not been selected was dismissed by the District Collector on 22-5-1972.

(2.) In the revision petition filed by the fifth respondent, the Government passed an order, G.O. 496 Revenue (H) Department dated 4-5-1972 stating that the punishment of removal was too severe and it should be reduced to one of the suspension during which the fifth respondent was out of notice. The Government therefore, directed the fifth respondent to be reinstated to duty.

(3.) The petitioner herein has filed this writ petition praying for this issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ direction or order quashing the G.O. 496 dated 4-5-1972. The case of the petitioner is that the order of removal of the fifth respondent passed by the Revenue Division officer on 18-1-1965 and confirmed on appeal by the District Collector on 16-4-1966 and in revision by the Government on 23-11-2967 has becomes final and the Government had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order purporting to revise the previous order which had become final. Rule 75 of the Village Officers Service Rules which confers revisonal power on the Government does not enable the Government to revise the order which had become final long before the rules come into operation.