M N DASANNA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .A Departmental Enquiry No. 16 of 1962 was held against Mr. M. N. Dasanna who was officer-in-charge of the Government Hospital at Vijayawada. After the enquiry Shri Nandagiri Venkatrao, Chairman of the Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal sent a report, dated 31st July, 1964 to the Government. The Government, after observing prescribed formalities, passed G.O. Ms. No. 3674 (Health), dated 3rd December, 1964 as a final order dismissing Dr. M. N. Dasanna from service with effect from the date of receipt of that order by him. The doctor filed this writ petition praying to issue writ or order or direction particularly a writ of certiorari after calling for the records in Departmental Enquiry No. 16 of 1962 and to quash the order of dismissal passed by the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 3674 (Health), dated 3rd December, 1964. There are two respondents to the writ petition. The first respondent is the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The second respondent is the Chairman, Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings.

(2.) The Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings at Hyderabad had a Chairman and another Member. On 22nd August, 1962, Shri K. Umapathi Rao, (Chairman) framed twenty-two charges against Dr. M. Dasanna (hereafter referred to for convenience as charged Officer). Charge No. 1 ran as follows :- "That you in abuse of your official position as officer-in-charge of the Government Hospital, Vijayawada, and actuated by corrupt motives, demanded Rs. 40 and accepted a sum of Rs. 20 as illegal gratification on 14th October, 1961 from late Sri Jampana Nageswararao of Vijayawada, in the Government Hospital, Vijayawada for giving treatment to late Pagadala Eladri of Vijayawada." Witnesses:- 1. Sri S. S. N. Reddy, D.S.P.A.C.B., Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada. 2. Sri G. Maheswararao, Inspector, A.C.B., Vijayawada. 3. Sri Tatineni Koteswararao, son of Venkatramiah, Vijayawada. 4. Sri Yelamanchilli Venkateswararao, son of Ramakotiah of Vijayawada. 5. Sri Chalamala Seshaiah, of Vijayawada. 6. Sri Dr. N. M. Rahman, Government Hospital, Vijayawada. 7. Sri P. C. Jishnu, Superintendent, Central Excise, Mahabubnagar. Charge No. 1 involved a trap and evidence about it. ChargeNos. 2 to 22 related to individual cases of corruption i.e. demanding and receiving bribes ; but they did not involve trap.

(3.) Shri Nandagiri Venkata Rao, who was the Chairman, sent a report of the Tribunal, dated 31st July, 1964. In it, he concluded as follows :- "Inlthe result, I have found Charges Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18 and 22 as proved against charged officer and the rest of the charges go as unproved." The Government after considering the report of the Tribunal, communicated a Memo No. 3906-A/64-1, Health, dated 15th September, 1964 to the charged officer as follows :- " A copy of the report of the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings enquiring into the allegations of corruption against Dr. M. N. Dasanna........................... ...................................................... is forwarded to him. (2) The Government agree with the presumptions drawn and findings arrived at by the Tribunal in respect of the charges in D.E. No. 16 of 1962 and direct Dr. M. N. Dasanna to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service." The charged officer duly sent his explanation, dated 30th October, 1964. The Government passed the impugned G.O. Ms. No. 3674, dated 3rd December, 1964 dismissing the charged officer from service. The Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Act, 1960 ( XI of 1960) as it stood at the dates of the enquiry and report and the impugned G.O. had provisions as follows. The preamble to the Act says that it is ' an act to provide the constitution of a Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings to inquire into allegations of misconduct on the part of Government servants and for other matters connected therewith'. Section 2 (d) defines "tribunal"as meaning the "tribunal constituted under section 3 "Section 3 deals with the constitution and composition of tribunal . It reads thus :- "(1) The Government shall constitute a Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings consisting of one or more members. * * * * * (3) Every member of the Tribunal shall be a Judicial Officer of the status of District Judge and his appointment shall be made by the Government. (4) If the Tribunal consists of mere than one member, one of the members shall be designated by the Government as the Chairman of the Tribunal. " Under section 4, the Government shall refer to the Tribunal for inquiry and report cases of allegations of misconduct on the part of Government servants. Section 5 deals with the power of Tribunal to summon and examine witnesses and direct production of documents. It says :-