B.Rupender Redy vs The Chairman Cum Presiding ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 585 Tel

   THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                             AND
        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                        WRIT APPEAL No.793 OF 2006

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

        The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

09.03.2005

passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.4516 of

2005.

The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the

appellant/writ petitioner was an employee of the Andhra Pradesh

State Electricity Board (APSEB). He was serving on the post of

Lower Division Clerk (LDC) and on 16.04.1992, he was placed

under suspension on account of misappropriation. On

14.05.1992, he was also directed to remit the misappropriated

amount and a charge sheet was issued thereafter. Finally, he was

removed from service on 26.11.1996. Against the order of removal,

the appellant/writ petitioner took shelter of the Industrial Tribunal

by filing a petition under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 i.e., I.D.No.115 of 1997. The Industrial Tribunal, keeping

in view that the case relates to misappropriation and especially in

the light of the fact that after charge sheet was issued, the amount

was remitted by the charged official, has passed an Award dated

21.11.2000 affirming the order of removal . Against the Award

passed by the Industrial Tribunal, writ petition was preferred and

the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition, as it was

a case of misappropriation. Not only this, the Award was passed

on 21.11.2000 and the writ petition was filed in the year 2005.

There was no explanation for the delay in filing the writ petition.

Now, the appellant/writ petitioner has filed the present writ appeal

being aggrieved by the order passed in the writ petition.

In the considered opinion of this Court, in case of

misappropriation, the punishment of removal is certainly not at all

disproportionate. Misappropriation is misappropriation and the

present case is an open-and-shut case, where the charged official

himself has deposited the amount back with the employer after he

was charge-sheeted. This Court does not find any reason to

interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

Resultantly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

11.02.2022 JSU