Prathipati Ananda Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 5133 AP

            HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
                   MAIN CASE No: W.P.No. 28335 of 2021

                               PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.                                                                                 OFFICE
        DATE                                 ORDER
No                                                                    NOTE.
                                                                     Transfe
2     10.12.2021 NJS, J                                              rred to
                                                                     io
                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and folder
                                                                     before
                 Mr. Syed Khader Masthan, learned Government
                                                                     correcti
                 Pleader attached to the office of Additional ons.
                                                                     B/o.
                 Advocate General-I.
                         It is the submission of the learned counsel for
                  the petitioner that there is a variance to the
                  statement of imputation and Article of charge as
                  framed, the enquiry cannot be proceeded with, as
                  there is no clarity in the allegations. In elaboration
                  he further submits that in the absence of specific
                  allegation   of    collusion   in      the   statement       of
                  imputation, the charge memorandum should be
                  considered as vague and places reliance on the
                  judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of
                  India v. Gyan Chand Chattar reported in (2009)
                  12 SCC 78. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said
                  judgment at Para No.32 observed that it is not
                  permissible to hold an enquiry on a vague charge as
                  the same does not give a clear picture to make an
                  effective defence and further in Para No.33 to the
                  effect that where a charge sheet is issued, without
                  giving specific and definite charge and no statement
                  of allegation is served along with the charge sheet,
                  the   enquiry     stands    vitiated    as    having       been
                  conducted in violation of principles of natural
                  justice.
                         The learned counsel has also attributed
                  malafides to respondent No.3 in issuing the

impugned charge memo, inter alia, for the averments made in Para No.8 of the writ petition.

Though the learned Government Pleader opposed granting any interim orders contending that there is no variation of charges as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Prima facie, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner made out a case for grant of interim order. Accordingly, there shall be interim direction as prayed for, for a period of eight (8) weeks.

List this matter after four (4) weeks for filing counter-affidavit.

Learned counsel for petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on respondent No.3 and file proof of service, in the meanwhile.

______ NJS, J BLV