SYED RAFIUDDIN AHMED Vs. A. P. TRANSCO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ by quashing the proceedings in Memo No.CE/TL and SS and HL/HYD/SAO/JAO.I/F No. CONFLD D.No.451/2002 dt.25/7/2002 and Memo No.GM(Per)/DE(DC)/ PO- NC/347/2000-10 dt.21/6/2003, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and opposed to the AP TRANSCO Regulations with a consequential direction to reinstate the 1st petitioner into service with all consequential benefits.

(2.) After filing of this Writ Petition, the 1st petitioner died and therefore his legal heirs have been brought on record.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the 1st petitioner was appointed as Lineman in APSEB in the year 1968. Thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant Supervisor in the year 1978 and subsequently joined as Additional Assistant Engineer (Operations) at Nidmanoor on 1/1/1981 and thereafter at various places in Nalgonda Circle up to December, 1996. He was posted to TLC Stores, Erragadda, Hyderabad and worked as AAE Q&C from October, 1996 to 3/11/1997 and as AAE Outdoor Stores, Erragadda, Hyderabad from 3/11/1997 to 16/4/2001. Subsequently he was transferred and posted as AAE Shift/132 KV Sub-Station, Kandi, Medak District and he was relieved on 16/4/2001 and reported on 1/6/2001. The period of handing over of charge was up to 30/5/2001. The petitioners submit that the materials and records were completely handed over as on 30/5/2001 and thereafter the 1st petitioner joined the Sub-Station at Kandi in Medak District. It is submitted that while working at Kandi, the EE/TCL/Erragadda/Hyderabad filed a complaint against the 1st petitioner on 12/8/2001 alleging tempering of records resulting in misappropriation of AP TRANSCO materials in TLC Stores, Erragadda to the tune of Rs.29,33,499.00. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner was placed under suspension with effect from 4/9/2001, i.e., the date of his arrest by the police. Disciplinary enquiry was ordered against him and the enquiry officer framed charges and issued charge sheet vide memo dt.28/12/2001 alleging that the 1st petitioner indulged in misappropriation of AP TRANSCO materials in TLC Stores, Erragadda to the tune of Rs.29,33,499.00. Thereafter, a supplementary charge sheet dt.2/3/2002 was also issued by the enquiry officer alleging that the 1st petitioner had indulged in further misappropriation of AP TRANSCO materials and the total of such sum is Rs.34,33,710.00. The 1st petitioner submitted his replies. However, the enquiry officer held the charges to have been proved and the disciplinary authority has issued a show-cause notice to the 1st petitioner as to why punishment of dismissal from service besides recovery of Rs.29,33,499.00 towards misappropriation of materials and Rs.2,02,635.00 towards shortage of material should not be passed. The 1st petitioner submitted his explanation, however the order of dismissal was passed, against which the 1st petitioner preferred an Appeal and the Appeal was also dismissed. The 1st petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the dismissal order and seeking reinstatement into service with all consequential benefits.