HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
W.P.No. 37194 of 2013
ORDER:(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)
This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the orders of the
A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for brevity 'the
Tribunal') passed in O.A.No.6593 of 2010 dt.12-08-2013.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I
appearing for the petitioners and Sri N.Sameera Asad, learned
counsel for the 1st respondent.
3. It has been contended by the petitioners that the 1st respondent was appointed as an attender on 04-07-1996 and posted him at Veterinary Dispensary, Renjal and the 1st respondent was involved in a criminal case in C.C.Nos.8 and 9 of 1998. However, he was acquitted of the said criminal charge by the competent Criminal Court vide judgment dt.10-09-1998. But the petitioners have terminated the services of the 1st respondent vide proceedings dt.30-04-1999 on the ground that the 1st respondent was involved in a criminal case. Aggrieved by the AKS,J & RRN,J 2 W.P.No.37194 of 2013 said orders of termination, the 1st respondent has approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.6593 of 2010 and the Tribunal vide orders dt.12-08-2013 was pleased to allow the O.A. and was pleased to set aside the orders of termination without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioners and the Tribunal was also directed the petitioners to pay back-wages and other consequential benefits.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that the 1st respondent has challenged the termination orders dt.30-04-1999 in 2010 and therefore the Tribunal was not justified in directing the petitioners to pay back-wages also. In fact, the Tribunal ought to have dismissed the O.A. on the ground of delay and latches but the Tribunal has not only set aside the orders of termination but also granted back-wages and consequential benefits. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition by setting aside the orders of Tribunal in O.A.No.6593 of 2010 dt.12-08-2013 and allow the Writ Petition.
5. This Court having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties is of the considered AKS,J & RRN,J 3 W.P.No.37194 of 2013 view that the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the termination orders on the ground that no regular departmental enquiry was conducted and no procedure was followed before terminating the services of the 1st respondent. However, the Tribunal could not have granted back-wages to the 1st respondent as admittedly the 1st respondent has challenged the orders of termination dt.13-04-1999, only in the year 2010 by filing O.A.No.6593 of 2010. Therefore, the orders of the Tribunal to the extent that the petitioners were directed to pay back-wages is set aside and the rest of the orders of the Tribunal shall remain unchanged.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in part. No costs.
7. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J _________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J Dt.07.12.2022 kvr