S NAGANNA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the dismissal of Writ Petition No. 6920 of 1983 at the admission stage. (Judgment of the Bench Delivered by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice)

(2.) The appellant is a member of the Panchayati Raj Engineering Seivice and was working as an Assistant Engineer when disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. His case was referred to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings and Tribunal Enquiry Case No. 13 of 1983 is pending against him in respect of certain charges framed against him in June, 1983 He has moved this Court under Art 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of mandamus restraining the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Hyderabad, from proceeding with the enquiry in T.EC.No. 13/83 on the ground that, after the constitution of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in accordance with the Presidential Order under Article 371-D of the Constitution the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings has no longer any jurisdiction in respect of any member of the civil service of the State. According to the appellant, that is a matter within the jurisdiction of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and consequently, no Court including the High Court has jurisdiction to deal with any matter concerning a member of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayati Raj Engineering Service of, for that matter, any other service of the State. It is also his case that, while some members of the service facing disciplinary enquiry are referred to the Tribunal for Disciplinary proceedings, in respect of others, an enquiry officer is appointed. This is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India. So far as the proceedings before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings are concerned they are wholly without jurisdiction.

(3.) Our learned brother, Jeevan Reddy J., has held that, under para 6 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Order, 1975. only the powers, hitherto exercised by Courts and not Tribunals are vested in tne Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and that the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings created under the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Act, 1960 (Act No. II of 1960). is only a Tribunal and not a Court for, it has no power of final adjudication and that it is only a 'recommendatory body. In that view, the learned Judge held that Para 6 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Order does not take away the jurisdiction, power or authoiity of the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings and confer them on the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. Hence, Clause 7 of Article 371-D of the Constitution of India does not operate to deprive the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings of the jurisdiction conferred upon it by the Andhra Pradesh Act II of 1960.