Telangana High Court
P. Rajeev vs Sandeep Kumar Sultania on 12 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION NO.18466 OF 2021;
CONTEMPT CASE NO.361 OF 2022
AND
I.A.NO.2 OF 2021 IN W.P.NO.18466 OF 2021
COMMON ORDER
W.P.No.18466 of 2021 In W.P.No.18466 of 2021, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Charge Memo in G.O.Rt.No.140, School Education (SE-Vig) Department, dt.11.10.2019 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to set aside the same and further to declare the action of the respondents in not effecting promotion to the petitioner as Additional Director as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Additional Director on par with his contemporaries with effect from 08.03.2021 with all consequential benefits, such as seniority, arrears of pay, etc., and to pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
W.P.No.18466 of 20212 & C.C.No.361 of 2022
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.No.18466 of 2021 are that the petitioner was directly recruited as Deputy Educational Officer on 29.12.2008 and was subsequently promoted as District Educational Officer on 02.05.2012 and thereafter as Regional Joint Director, Warangal on 27.10.2017 and was transferred to the post of Joint Director, Model Schools on 09.12.2019. The petitioner was working as Joint Director, Samagra Shiksha at the time of filing of the Writ Petition. It is submitted that while the petitioner was working as District Educational Officer, Warangal for a very brief period, namely from 28.08.2015 to 10.10.2016, the Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation (GWMC) took up road widening project during April, 2015 and that the then District Educational Officer who received notices about the road widening from the Commissioner, GWMC, appears to have given his consent, whereunder, around 887 square metres of land of Government High School, Subedari was likely to be affected. It is submitted that after the petitioner joined as District Educational officer, Warangal on 28.08.2015 and when the road widening was under process, the petitioner immediately reported the said development to his higher officials, i.e., Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal, W.P.No.18466 of 2021 3 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 vide letter RC.No.6109/C3/2015 dt.29.07.2016 and the same was informed to the 2nd respondent by the concerned Regional Director and accordingly the land was restored to the school authorities. It is submitted that the said fact of the petitioner informing the Regional Joint Director and restoring the land to the school authorities was not considered by the Vigilance authorities and based on the Vigilance Report, a Charge Memo was issued to the petitioner vide G.O.Rt.No.140 dt.11.10.2019. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 23.11.2019 and a further additional explanation on 29.07.2021. But the explanation submitted by the petitioner was not considered and the petitioner was ignored for promotion by the Departmental Promotion Committee which was constituted and conducted vide proceedings on 08.02.2021. It is submitted that six posts of Joint Director fell vacant and since the petitioner was within the zone of consideration, he was entitled to be considered for promotion, but in view of the Charge Memo dt.25.10.2019, the petitioner was not considered. The petitioner submitted that though the Charge Memo was issued on 25.10.2019 and the petitioner has submitted his explanation on 23.11.2019, the letter dt.09.03.2021 to conclude the disciplinary proceedings against the W.P.No.18466 of 2021 4 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 petitioner and the letter dt.19.04.2021 requesting to drop the charges and letter dt.02.07.2021 requesting to include his name in the DPC and the letter dt.02.07.2021 also requesting to take steps to drop charges, were all ignored and according to the petitioner, there is absolutely no progress in the departmental enquiry. It is submitted that neither any enquiry officer was appointed nor is his case being considered for promotion. It is submitted that the case of the petitioner was also referred to the Registrar, Institution of A.P. and T.S. Lokayukta, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad and a copy was also marked to respondent No.2, but no further proceedings were issued by the authorities so far. It is submitted that there are two posts of Additional Directors which are available in the Department and the petitioner's case can be considered in any of the existing or future vacancies without reference to the Charge Memo. The petitioner is also challenging the Charge Memo in this Writ Petition.
3. Vide orders dt.10.08.2021, this Court had granted interim direction as prayed for, i.e., directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner to the post of Additional Director of School Education without reference to the Charge Memo dt.11.10.2019 pending W.P.No.18466 of 2021 5 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 disposal of the main Writ Petition. However, the said interim order was not complied with by the respondents and therefore, the petitioner has filed C.C.No.361 of 2022.
4. In the meanwhile, the respondents have filed a vacate petition in I.A.No.2 of 2021 and therefore, the vacate petition as well as the Contempt Case are both taken up for hearing together.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to G.O.Rt.No.140, School Education (SE.Vig) Department, dt.11.10.2019 and Annexure-I thereto, wherein articles of charge levelled against the petitioner are mentioned. From the said article, it is noticed that the allegation against the petitioner was that he being District Educational Officer, Karimnagar District and successor to Sri Y.Chandra Mohan, Former District Educational Officer, has neither reported the surrendering of land to an extent of 887 square metres pertaining to the Government High School, Subedari to Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation, Warangal, to the higher authorities nor has taken steps to stop the occupation of the school land by the GWMC and construction in the premises even after knowing that the transfer of land to Greater Warangal Municipal Corporation was not W.P.No.18466 of 2021 6 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 permitted by the competent authority and therefore, he exhibited slackness and negligence towards his legitimate duties and contravened Rule 3 of the Telangana State Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. He has also referred to the letter addressed by Sri Y.Balaiah, Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal to the Registrar, Institution of AP&TS Lokayukta to take action against the predecessor of the petitioner, i.e., Y.Chandra Mohan, District Educational Officer, Nalgonda, who had given consent for the occupation of the land by GWMC without getting the approval from the authorities. He has also referred to the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the Secretary to Government of Telangana, Education Department (Vigilance), dt.20.11.2019 about the entire incident and that as soon as he came to know about the news in the newspaper publication on 04.12.2015, he immediately visited the GHS, Subedari, Hanamkonda School and brought the matter to the notice of the then Deputy Chief Minister and Minister for School Education, Government of Telangana Sri Kadiyam Srihari garu through e-mail dt.04.12.2015 as well as RJDSE, Warangal. It is submitted that the petitioner has taken all steps to see that the land of the school is not surrendered but he is being punished for no wrong W.P.No.18466 of 2021 7 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 on his part. It is submitted that the petitioner has assumed the charge only on 28.08.2015 and even though the petitioner has informed about the construction by GWMC vide e-mail dt.04.12.2015, no action was taken and he has not received any instructions from higher authorities regarding the steps to stop occupation of the land till 10.10.2016. It is submitted that on 11.10.2016, the petitioner joined as DEO, Karimnagar. It is submitted that thereafter, no steps have been taken by the authorities for either conducting an enquiry or for dropping the proceedings against the petitioner. He therefore placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prem Nath Bali Vs. Registrar, High Court of Delhi 1 for the proposition that departmental enquiry should be concluded within a reasonable period, i.e., within six months from the date of initiation. He therefore prayed for setting aside of the Charge Memo and a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion.
6. Learned Special Government Pleader, however, relied upon the averments made in the vacate petition and the counter affidavit filed therewith and prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition. 1 AIR 2016 Supreme Court 101 : 2016 LAB.I.C.533 W.P.No.18466 of 2021 8 & C.C.No.361 of 2022
7. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the impugned Charge Memo was issued on the basis of the report of the General Administration (Vigilance & Enforcement) Department dt.18.11.2017. It is stated that the explanation submitted by the petitioner has been forwarded to the Government for taking further action in the matter and the matter is under examination. As regards the request for consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion, it is stated that there are six existing vacancies for promotion to the post of Additional Director of School Education in the State for the panel year 2016-2017 issued in G.O.Ms.No.11, School Education (Ser.I) Department dt.13.04.2017. It is submitted that the panel year 2016-2017 ended at roster point No.5 and the panel started from roster point No.6 for the panel year 2020-2021. It is submitted that if the said roster points are followed, there are seniors to the petitioner who would be coming under the zone of consideration for placing before the Departmental Promotion Committee. The names of the five officers who were considered for promotion to the post of Additional Director of School Education are given and it is stated that the petitioner stood at Serial No.6 in the seniority list and therefore did not come under the zone of consideration. It is also stated that no juniors W.P.No.18466 of 2021 9 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 to the petitioner were promoted as Additional Director of School Education as per the State and Subordinate Service Rules. A copy of the Vigilance report dt.26.10.2018 which formed the basis for issuance of the Charge Memo against the petitioner herein, is filed. As seen therefrom, action has been initiated against the predecessor DEO of the petitioner, i.e., Y.Chandra Mohan as well as the petitioner herein.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the counter affidavit, the respondents have admitted that there are six vacancies of Additional Director and also that only five officers have been considered against the said posts and therefore, the petitioner being the next candidate in rank should be considered for promotion without reference to the Charge Memo.
9. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he has not taken steps to stop construction or occupation of the Government school land by GWMC and that he did not inform the higher authorities about the same. The Vigilance report is dated 18.11.2017, whereas the petitioner claims to have informed the higher ups on 04.12.2015. However, the petitioner has not placed the copy of W.P.No.18466 of 2021 10 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 the e-mail before this Court except making reference to it in the affidavit. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prem Nath Bali Vs. Registrar, High Court of Delhi (1 supra), the Government ought to have concluded the disciplinary proceedings expeditiously, i.e., within a period of six months from the date of initiation of the proceedings. The petitioner has admittedly submitted his explanation and also defence statement, but the Government has not taken any action thereafter. The Charge Memo was issued in the year 2019 and in spite of lapse of nearly four years, no action has been taken by the Department even in appointing an enquiry officer. For this reason alone, the action against the petitioner should be dropped. However, in the interest of justice, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondents to conclude the enquiry against the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the disciplinary proceedings are not concluded within the said period, then the disciplinary proceedings shall be deemed to have been dropped against the petitioner. And in the meantime, the case of the petitioner shall be considered for promotion to the post of Additional Director W.P.No.18466 of 2021 11 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 without reference to the Charge Memo subject to the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings.
10. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
C.C.No.361 of 2022
11. As regards the Contempt Case, this Court finds that there was an interim direction to consider the case of the petitioner to the post of Additional Director of School Education. However, the respondents have not considered the same. Admittedly, there is a post of Additional Director which is vacant and therefore, the respondents should have considered the case of the petitioner for promotion subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition. But the respondents have not done so by relying upon the vacate petition filed. However, in the final order even dated, this Court has directed the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of Additional Director subject to the final outcome of the Writ Petition. Subject to the compliance of the above direction, the Contempt Case is closed.
W.P.No.18466 of 202112 & C.C.No.361 of 2022 I.A.No.2 of 2021
12. As a sequel, I.A.No.2 of 2021 in W.P.No.18466 of 2021 is dismissed.
13. In the result,
(i) W.P.No.18466 of 2021 is disposed of with the above directions.
(ii) C.C.No.361 of 2022 is closed.
(iii) I.A.No.2 of 2021 in W.P.No.18466 of 2021 is dismissed.
(iv) There shall be no order as to costs in these cases.
14. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in W.P.No.18466 of 2021 and in C.C.No.361 of 2022, including I.A.No.1 of 2023 in C.C.No.361 of 2022 shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 12.03.2024 Svv