GOVERNMENT OF AP Vs. T V RAMA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE these two writ petitions arise out of a common order dated 27. 03. 2006 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative tribunal, Hyderabad, in O. A. Nos. 7821 of 2003 and batch, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THESE writ petitions are filed by the state of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its principal Secretary, Agriculture and cooperation, for Writ of Certiorari so far as it relates to the common order dated 27. 03. 2006 passed in O. A. Nos. 7821 and 1273 of 2003 by the Andhra Pradesh administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and to quash the same holding as erroneous and contrary to law.

(3.) BRIEF facts are that the respondent worked as Co-operative Sub-Registrar in the office of Commissioner for Co-operation and registrar of Co-operative Societies hyderabad from 1989 till September 1992. During the said period, he also acted as secretary of Sri Bhavana Rushi Co-operative housing Society Limited (for short "society" ). On the allegation of misappropriation of the funds of the Society, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent and ultimately, the Additional Registrar of co-operative Societies/disciplinary authority, by proceedings dated 25. 06. 1993, dismissed the respondent from service. It may be noted here that the respondent has to actually retire from service on 30. 06. 1994. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, respondent filed o. A. No. 3841 of 1994 before the Tribunal, which was dismissed by the Tribunal by order dated 28. 07. 1999. Challenging the same, the respondent filed Review M. A. No. 2243 of 1999 before the Tribunal, which was also dismissed by the Tribunal by order dated 11. 09. 2000. Questioning the same, he filed w. P. No. 20854 of 1999 before this Court, which was remanded to the Tribunal. Pursuant thereto, the Review M. A. , was reopened and after hearing both the parties, the Tribunal, by order dated 11. 09. 2001, set aside the order of dismissal of the respondent from service, granting liberty to the petitioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings (DPT) for taking appropriate action. However, DPT refused to accept the file referred by the petitioner on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the case of a retired Government servant under Rule 3 of the A. P. C. S. (DPT)Rules 1989 read with Section 4 of the a. P. C. S (DPT) Act 1960. Subsequently, the government issued G. O. Rt. No. 1225 dated 22. 11. 2002 stating that as the Tribunal has set aside only the order of dismissal, but not the charge memo issued to the respondent, it is deemed that the disciplinary action against the respondent was initiated while he was in service and therefore, he is deemed to have been placed under suspension from the date of dismissal to the date of retirement i. e. , from 25. 06. 1993 to 30. 06. 1994 pending further disciplinary action against him. Challenging the said g. O. Rt. No. 1225, the respondent filed o. A. No. 1273 of 2003.