B. Akhil Kumar vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 3178 Tel

        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

              WRIT PETITION No.32199 of 2021
ORDER :

Petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents to finalise

the proceedings initiated against him pursuant to the Memorandum

of Charge issued vide G.O.Rt.No.570, dated 28.07.2018 and to

promote him as a Manager from the date on which his immediate

junior was promoted, with all consequential monetary benefits and

seniority.

2. Heard Sri Goda Siva, learned Senior Counsel for petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration

and Urban Development, appearing for respondents.

3. Case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Junior

Assistant on compassionate basis as his father expired while in

service. Accordingly, he joined duty on 23.12.2011. Later, he was

promoted as Senior Assistant in April, 2017. The next promotion

post is Manager and the petitioner is senior-most in the category of

Senior Assistant for being promoted as Manager. However, the

respondents have promoted his junior by name Mr.D.Swamy on

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

05.02.2021, on the ground that disciplinary proceedings are

pending against the petitioner.

4. It is stated that basing on the vigilance report dated

01.12.2016, the petitioner along with 27 other officers were

charged with the allegation that they did not remit the taxes

collected from the public in the account of the Municipality and

misappropriated such funds by concealing the receipt books. The

petitioner was issued with a charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.570,

dated 20.07.2018, which was served on him on 28.07.2018, for

which, he submitted explanation on 25.08.2018 denying the

charge. One year after submission of his explanation, the

Government has issued G.O.Rt.No.442, dated 19.06.2019

appointing the inquiry officer to conduct inquiry against the 28

charged officers. It took one and half years for the inquiry officer

to hold preliminary inquiry and it was held on 25.01.2021, on

which date, he submitted a written explanation to the inquiry

officer. The grievance of the petitioner is that the inquiry officer's

report is not furnished to him so far and there is unexplained

inordinate delay on the part of respondents in bringing the

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

proceedings to a logical conclusion. However, he came to know

that the inquiry officer had submitted his report on 30.02.2021 and

more than 4 officers were exonerated from the charges. Thus, the

petitioner's case is that there are chances of his getting exonerated

also, however, the respondents are selectively concluding the

proceedings against some officers and they are not finalizing the

proceedings against him, and in the meanwhile, the respondents are

taking steps for filling up the vacancies of Manager by constituting

the Departmental Promotion Committee and the seniority list of

eligible Senior Assistants is called for. Hence, the present writ

petition is filed seeking to direct the respondents to finalise the

proceedings initiated against the petitioner, as his promotion is

being stalled on the ground of pendency of disciplinary

proceedings.

5. Counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent stating that

there were allegations that while working in Nalgonda

Municipality, the petitioner and other officials of the said

Municipality have caused loss to the tune of Rs.3,32,59,133/- by

not remitting the taxes collected from the public into the account of

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

the Municipality during the years from 2011 to 2015. Therefore,

Articles of Charge were framed against the petitioner vide

G.O.Rt.No.570, dated 20.07.2018. It is stated that sufficient time

was given to the petitioner to submit his statement of defence and

thereafter, the Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer were

appointed vide G.O.Rt.No.442, dated 19.06.2019 and

G.O.Rt.No.633, dated 04.12.2020 respectively. The inquiry officer

has submitted the inquiry report on 30.06.2021, holding that all the

three charges levelled against the petitioner are proved. The

inquiry report was communicated to the petitioner vide

Government Memo dated 12.01.2022 and in response to the same,

the petitioner has also submitted his explanation on 10.02.2022. It

is stated in the counter affidavit that since it is a common inquiry

conducted against 28 officers involving an amount of more than

Three Crores of Rupees, there is some delay in concluding the

proceedings, which is neither willful nor wanton. It is stated that in

the inquiry, it is proved that the petitioner has failed to reconcile

the Chitta Register with remitted amount into the Municipality

account and as an Accountant, he has miserably failed in his duty

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

and given scope for misappropriation of amount, and thus, caused

loss to the Municipality. It is stated that the inquiry report is

forwarded to the Government and the Government is to take

appropriate decision with regard to imposing the punishment under

the CCA Rules. It is further stated that since the charges levelled

against the petitioner are of grave nature and the same are held

proved in the inquiry beyond reasonable doubt, the petitioner is not

eligible to be considered for promotion. Accordingly, he prayed

for dismissal of the writ petition.

6. The record disclose that inquiry was initiated against 28

officers of a Municipality alleging that they misappropriated an

amount of more than Three Crores of Rupees by not depositing the

taxes collected from the public, in to the bank account of the

Municipality, by manipulating the receipt books. The said

allegations relate to the period from 2011 to 2015. The basis for

initiation of inquiry proceedings was the vigilance report dated

01.12.2016. Charges were framed on 20.07.2018, Inquiry Officer

was appointed on 19.06.2019, Presenting Officer was appointed on

04.12.2020, inquiry report was submitted on 30.06.2021, the same

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

was communicated to the petitioner on 12.01.2022, the petitioner

has submitted his explanation to the inquiry report on 10.02.2022

and the matter is now pending with the Government for passing

further orders. The case of the petitioner is that since the

proceedings are pending for a long period, he is denied of

promotion to the next post of Manager and that his junior, namely,

Mr.D.Swamy was promoted as Manager, vide order dated

05.02.2021. On the other hand, the respondents contend that as the

petitioner herein and 27 others were charged with the allegation of

misappropriation of amount to the tune of more than Three Crores

of Rupees and as the said act of misappropriation spread over the

period from 2011 to 2015, it took some time for initiation of

proceedings, examining the records and concluding the same. It is

also the case of respondents that now the inquiry was completed

holding that the charges levelled against the petitioner are proved,

the petitioner has also submitted his explanation to the inquiry

report on 10.02.2022 and the matter is pending with the

Government for passing further orders. Though there is some force

in the stand taken by the respondents that the delay in concluding

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

the proceedings was due to involvement of 28 officers in

misappropriation of funds to the tune of more than Three Crores of

Rupees over a period of five years i.e. from 2011 to 2015 as

inquiry/investigation into such matter requires verification of

records relating to many years and examination of the persons

involved, at the same time, the petitioner shall not be denied

promotion for a longer period. In this connection, the learned

Senior Counsel for petitioner has relied on the judgment of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others v.

Chaman Lal Goyal 1. In the said case, when the inquiry was

initiated after a long gap of 5½ years after the incident, the Hon'ble

Supreme Court has ordered for promoting the petitioner therein

subject to the result of the departmental inquiry and also fixed time

for completion of disciplinary proceedings.

7. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the aforesaid judgment and in the facts and circumstances of the

present case, this Court is of the considered view that the case of

(1995) 2 SCC 570

JS, J W.P.No.32199 of 2021

the petitioner can be considered for promotion subject to the

outcome of the proceedings initiated against him.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to

the post of Manager from the date on which his junior was

promoted. However, such promotion shall be subject to the

outcome of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the

petitioner. The respondents are further directed to pass appropriate

orders in the disciplinary proceedings insofar as petitioner is

concerned, and conclude the same within a period of one year from

today. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

____________________ JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J Date: 16.10.2023

ajr