THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION No.4845 of 2019
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the impugned charge memo in Tribunal Enquiry Case No.614 of 2013 issued by the 3rd respondent for the incident relating to the year 2011 i.e., after the date of retirement of the petitioner, contrary to Rule 9 (2) (b) (ii) of A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the respondents.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was working as Assistant Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, retired from service on 31.05.2018 and that a charge memo was issued to him on 24.07.2018, which was served on him on 04.02.2019 for the incident pertaining to the year 2011. The counsel for the petitioner submits that in the similar circumstances, a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of 2 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi WP. No.4845 of 2019 Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh, has passed a common order dated 15.11.2018, in W.P.Nos. 25587, 26311 and 26381 of 2018, by relying on the judgment in State of U.P. v. Shri Krishna Pandey, 1wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with initiation of a departmental enquiry against the respondent therein after his retirement from service, observed that as in Rule 9 (2) (b) (ii) of the Rules of 1980, Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations, which was under consideration, provided that departmental proceedings, if not instituted before retirement, shall not be instituted in respect of an event which took place more than four years before such institution, as in Rule 9 (6) of the Rules of 1980, the Explanation to Regulation 351-A provided that departmental proceedings shall be deemed to have been instituted when the charges framed against the pensioner were issued to him or from the date of his being placed under suspension, if applicable. Ultimately the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that departmental proceedings must be instituted before lapse of four years from the date on which the event of misconduct had taken place.
1 (1996) 9 SCC 395 3 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi WP. No.4845 of 2019
4. Admittedly, in this case, the charges pertain to the period of more than four years prior to the retirement of the petitioner. Hence, in view of the above circumstances, this Court opines that the charge memo dated 24.07.2018 is liable to be quashed.
5. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, quashing the charge memo dated 24.07.2018 issued against the petitioner. 1st respondent is directed to fix the pension payable to the petitioner and pay the retirement benefits such as full pension, retirement gratuity, encashment of Earned Leave and other benefits to the petitioner together with interest @ 9% per annum from the date they become due till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J Date: 20.10.2023 lk 4 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi WP. No.4845 of 2019 9 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI WRIT PETITION No.4845 OF 2019 Date: 20.10.2023 lk