Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
T.V.S.Jogarao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 29 January, 2021
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.2207 OF 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of
Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not disposing of
the charges (two) levelled against the petitioner which were initiated on
04.04.2017 and withholding the pension benefits by showing the pendency of
charges in spite of several representations more particularly the
representation dated 25.11.2020, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and pass such
other order or orders."
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner joined
in Tribal Welfare Department as Additional Assistant Engineer, he
retired from service on attaining superannuation on 30.07.2018 and
at the time of his retirement, he was working as Executive Engineer
at TW Division, Nellore, Nellore District. He rendered unblemished
service till the date of retirement from the date of joining in service,
but charges were framed on 04.04.2017, which is one year before
retirement calling upon this petitioner to file his written statement
based on unanimous complaint. To the show cause given by the
respondent authorities, the petitioner submitted a written statement
on 28.12.2017. Since the date of filing of written statement no
further action is taken and the disciplinary proceedings are kept
pending and thereby denied retirement benefits to this petitioner and
it is violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles
14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and requested to issue a
direction as stated supra.
3. During the course of hearing, Sri Almas Mohammed, learned
counsel for the petitioner requested to issue a direction to the
respondents to take appropriate action in the disciplinary
proceedings on the basis of written statement filed by this petitioner
on 28.12.2017. Whereas, learned Government Pleader for Services-III
fairly accepted to pass appropriate orders based on the Articles of
charges and written statement filed by this petitioner on 28.12.2017.
4. In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel for
the petitioner, this Court is not required to adjudicate the dispute in
question on merits. This Court is conscious that no such direction be
issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in "The
Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1", wherein the Apex Court
held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases
in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do not service to
the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself
requested to issue a direction to issue a direction to the respondents
to take appropriate action in the disciplinary proceedings on the
basis of written statement filed by this petitioner on 28.12.2017,
I find no other alternative, except to issue such direction.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the
respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders either to provide or
to drop the proceedings based on the written statement filed by this
petitioner on 28.12.2017, within four (04) weeks from today, in
accordance with law. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand
closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 29.01.2021
IS
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.2207 OF 2021
Date: 29.01.2021
IS
