DISTRICT JUDGE ELURU Vs. N CHANDRASEKHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ petitioner-respondent has moved this Court questioning the order of dismissal from service. A learned Single Judge of this Court has held that the misconduct is proved but interfered with the quantum of punishment and directed for reinstatement of the petitioner-respondent with 50% of the back wages from the date of dismissal till the date of his reinstatement. The District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District and the Registrar (Administration) of the High Court have preferred this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) Facts which are noticed in the impugned judgment and which are not disputed before us, are as follows: In the affidavit in support of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner was appointed as Process Server by the District and Sessions Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District. He, however, was subjected to a disciplinary proceeding on two charges viz.,

(3.) In course of the enquiry, although defacto-complainant for the first charge was not examined, a Clerk of the Court, however, deposed and the Enquiry Officer held that the charge was proved. The District Judge decided to impose the punishment of dismissal. There is nothing, however, on the record to show that the petitioner-respondent preferred any administrative appeal and, if any, what finally happened in the administrative appeal. Learned Single Judge has adverted to the contentions of the parties and has finally commented: