Godi Sunny Babu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 247 AP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 247 AP
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2023

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Godi Sunny Babu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 January, 2023

Bench: Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

 HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

             WRIT PETITION No. 1101 OF 2023


ORAL ORDER:


      Heard Sri Bokka Satyanarayana, learned Counsel for the

Writ Petitioners and Sri G. Srinivasula Reddy, learned Standing

Counsel for Respondent Nos.4,5 & 6.

2. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has submitted

that the Extension Officer (PR & RD), Mandal Parishad,

Palakoderu, has issued a Notice dated 04.11.2022 to ten

persons (working as Village Volunteers) asking them to attend

an Enquiry, which is to be conducted at 11.00 A.M on

05.11.2022. The present Writ Petitioners, three in number, are

among the 10 persons who have received this Notice. In

pursuance of the Enquiry by Proceedings bearing

Rc.No.C/570/2022 dated 21.12.2022, the present Writ

Petitioners were removed from service with immediate effect.

3. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has submitted

that the Notice dated 04.11.2022 (Ex.P.2) does not contain any

specific charge and it only indicates that Enquiry was being

conducted and Writ Petitioners have been directed to appear

before the Enquiry on the scheduled date i.e., 05.11.2022.

4. Sri G. Srinivasula Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for

Respondent Nos.4,5 & 6 has submitted that the Enquiry Report

was submitted by the concerned Officer on 14.11.2022 to the

Respondent No.4 and that basing on such Enquiry Report, the

Respondent No.4 has initiated action which is impugned herein.

5. On perusal of the Impugned Order (Ex.P.1), it is noticed

that the Impugned Order does not indicate the submission of

the Enquiry Report, as submitted by the learned Standing

Counsel for Respondent Nos.4,5 & 6, on 14.11.2022.

6. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has submitted

that in any case, Notice dated 04.11.2022 (Ex.P.2) does not

contain any specific allegation or charge against the Writ

Petitioners, and therefore, the Enquiry that was conducted

without there being any specific charge is a sham one, and it

does not stand to the legal scrutiny.

7. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has drawn the

attention of this Court to an Order passed by this Court in a

batch of Writ Petitions bearing W.P.No.36663 of 2022 and batch

dated 23.11.2022 to contend that when the Show Cause Notice

does not contain any specific charge, the alleged Delinquent

Employee will not be able to answer the specific charge, and

therefore, such Enquiry would be a nonest one in the eye of law.

Learned Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the

relevant portions of the Judgment, which are usefully extracted

hereunder :

"6. When this Court perused the Show Cause Notice, it is noticed that the none of these specific Complaints of the Villagers were served on the Writ Petitioner vide Show Cause Notice dated 29.10.2022.

7. This Court notices that the Reply given by the Writ Petitioner in a general manner is exactly a response to the Show Cause Notice which did not contain any specific allegation nor was any specific complaint of the individual Villagers been served along with the Show Cause Notice.

8. Unless the Writ Petitioner is put to notice as regards specific Complaints/Grievances made by the Villagers, the Writ Petitioner could not have responded to the specific grievances made by the Villages. It is surprising to note that though the specific complaints of the Villagers were referred to in every Departmental Communication/Proceedings (between the Authorities) that were contemplated for initiating action against the Writ Petitioner, these complaints were neither referred to in the Show Cause Notice nor were furnished to the Writ Petitioner.

9. The Enquiry Report prepared against the Writ Petitioner was by taking into consideration the specific complaints of the Villagers on one hand, and also by considering the ambiguous answers given by the Writ Petitioner to the ambiguous charges made against the Writ Petitioner on the other hand appears to be a sham proceeding.

10. In this view of the matter, the Proceedings which are initiated against the Writ Petitioner, cannot be sustained in law as the incriminating material that is put against the Writ Petitioner was neither disclosed nor were served on him at any stage of the Proceedings, and therefore, the Impugned Proceedings deserve to be quashed."

8. This Court, after perusing the Impugned Order, deems

it appropriate to allow the present Writ Petition by setting aside

the Impugned Order dated 21.12.2022 bearing

Rc.No.C/570/2022. The Respondents are directed to reinstate

the Writ Petitioners into service as Village Volunteers with

immediate effect, in any case, not later than two weeks from

today. However, the Respondents are at liberty to initiate fresh

Proceedings if they are so advised, but while doing so, the

Respondents shall furnish each and every complaint/material

that would be used or considered by the Authorities against the

Writ Petitioners for initiating any action. The Respondents shall

frame specific charges and seek specific responses from the