Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 688 (TS)

J. Janardhan v. State Of Telangana

2024-09-06

NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

body2024
ORDER : Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J. Since the issue raised in these writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No.23146 of 2019 are discussed hereunder:- (i) The petitioner was appointed as Grade-II Warden on 22.02.1983, which is now re-designated as Hostel Welfare Officer and posted as Government SW Boys Hostel Velair of Warangal District. After attaining the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 30.09.2009 from Government S.W. Boys Hostel, Dornakal, Warangal District. While the petitioner was working at Govt. S.W. Boys Hostel, Nellikudur of Warangal District, based on the preliminary enquiry report furnished by the Joint Director (Vigilance), O/o. DSW, (AP), Hyderabad, in all 32 Wardens/Matrons of Social Welfare Hostels in Warangal District, including the petitioner, were placed under suspension, vide proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.A2/12070/94, dated 17.08.1994, alleging that the petitioner has committed certain financial irregularities in maintenance of said hostel for the year 1993-94. Subsequently, charges have been framed against the petitioner by the 2nd respondent vide Charge Memo No.A3/A1/780/94, dated 26.12.1994 and the same was communicated to the 3rd respondent for taking further action. The 3rd respondent framed Articles of charges against the petitioner and called for the explanation from the petitioner. After receipt of the explanation from the petitioner, the Assistant Director (Legal Cell) O/o.CSW (AP) Hyderabad was appointed as Common Enquiry Officer for conducting detailed enquiry under Rule 24(i) of APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991 vide proceedings in Rc.No.M1/21006/94, dated 04.06.1995. After considering the enquiry report pertaining to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings in Rc.No.A3/780/94-VI, dated 10.07.1996, stating as follows :- “…The Warden remitted back an amount of Rs.65,632/- as per the amount shown in the charge memo prior to receipt of enquiry report. So a lenient view is taken in awarding punishment. Therefore, the following punishment is awarded to Sri J.Janardhan, Warden (U/S) and reinstated to the service under Rule 20 A.P.C.S. (CCA) Rule, 1991. 1. Stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect. 2. Suspension period to be treated as leave on loss of pay. Posting orders will be issued separately.” (ii) Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 06.10.1996, but the Commissioner/Appellate Authority neither considered his appeal nor was it rejected. 1. Stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect. 2. Suspension period to be treated as leave on loss of pay. Posting orders will be issued separately.” (ii) Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 06.10.1996, but the Commissioner/Appellate Authority neither considered his appeal nor was it rejected. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to set aside the proceedings in Rc.No.A3/780/94, dated 10.07.1996. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cases of the petitioners are similarly situated to HWOs of Warangal District with regard to the same issue pertaining to the years 1991-92 and 1993-94, which were allowed by the then A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.8815, 3865, 5832, 6506, 6525, 7194, 7195, 7620 and 9069 of 2012; and pertaining to the year 1991-94 in O.A.Nos.8851 of 2012 and batch and O.A.No.8700 of 2012 and O.A.No.8895 of 2012, by setting aside the charge memos/disciplinary proceedings/impugned G.O.Rt.Nos. of the 1st respondent therein and consequential proceedings of the 3rd respondent for the inordinate and unexplained delay by relying on the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of A.P. Vs. N.Radhakrishna 1998 (4) SCC 154 and P.V.MAHADEVAN Vs. M.D.Tamilnadu Housing Board. AIR 2006 SC 207 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that following the said decisions, the Tribunal, by order dated 25.07.2014 directed the respondents therein to pay full pension and retiral benefits to the applicants along with interest and gratuity as per Rules. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the alleged charges pertain to 1993-94, and the Enquiry Officer had submitted his report holding that the charges levelled against the petitioners have not been proved. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that with regard to the same issue, several writ petitions were allowed by this Court in W.P.(TR).No.2283 of 2017, W.P.No.32041 of 2014, W.P.No.11821 of 2020, W.P.No.3513 of 2022 and subsequently, the Government has also passed G.Os. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners herein retired from service on different dates, after attaining the age of superannuation. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that similarly situated colleagues/HWOs of Warangal District cases were considered in O.A.No.8700 of 2012 dated 26.09.2014 and O.A.No.8895 of 2012, dated 26.06.2016, wherein the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders therein. 9. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that similarly situated colleagues/HWOs of Warangal District cases were considered in O.A.No.8700 of 2012 dated 26.09.2014 and O.A.No.8895 of 2012, dated 26.06.2016, wherein the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders therein. 9. This Court allowed W.P.No.11821 of 2020 on 06.01.2023 by observing as follows :- 10. It is pertinent to mention here that in the case of similarly situated persons, who filed the O.A.No. 6104 of 2O11 and batch, the then Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by its order dt. 19.10.2012 allowed the said O.As by granting full pension and retirement benefits to the applicants therein with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the O.As, other than gratuity and the gratuity amount shall be paid together with interest as per rules. Aggrieved by the said order, the Government filed Writ Petitions vide W.P.No.16263 of 2013 and batch, and the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 09.12.2013 decided as follows: "Accordingly, the order of the Tribunal to the extent of granting interest on the pension and other retiral benefits payable to the respondent/applicants, is set-aside. The petitioners shall release the pension and other retiral benefits payable to the 1st respondent/applicants within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. In all other respect:, the order of the Tribunal stand’s confirmed." 11. In view of the above discussion and owing to the orders passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of similarly situated persons, the present Writ Petition is liable to be allowed. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated O4.O8.2O11 including the disciplinary proceedings. Consequently, the respondents are directed to take necessary action for the release of all retirement benefits including full pension to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.” 10. This Court allowed W.P.(TR).No.2283 of 2017 on 19.06.2023 by observing as follows :- 21. In view of the above judicial pronouncements, if any order is is passed at the instance of the higher authority, without application of independent mind by the disciplinary authority, itself is illegal and the same is unsustainable. This Court allowed W.P.(TR).No.2283 of 2017 on 19.06.2023 by observing as follows :- 21. In view of the above judicial pronouncements, if any order is is passed at the instance of the higher authority, without application of independent mind by the disciplinary authority, itself is illegal and the same is unsustainable. Moreover, there was an inordinate delay for concluding the disciplinary proceedings and this Court had already considered the similar set of facts and circumstances in W.P.No.11821 of 2020 and 3513 of 2020 and allowed these writ petitions. 22. In view of the above having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is allowed by setting aside the G.O.Rt.No.727, dated.16.11.2012 and its consequential proceedings dated.27.04.2013. Consequently, the respondents are directed to take necessary action for the release of all retirement benefits, pending if any, including full pension to the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of (3) Three months for the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(TR)No.2283 of 2017 and W.P.No.11821 of 2020, the 1st respondent issued G.O.Rt.No.32 dated 05.03.2024 and G.O.Rt.No.9 dated 24.01.2021 respectively, wherein the Government implemented the said orders passed by this Court in W.P.(TR)No.2283 of 2017 and W.P.No.11821 of 2020, and accordingly released all the retirement benefits including full pension to the petitioners therein. Since the cases of the petitioners are similar to the facts and circumstances of the said cases and since the issue is identical, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petitions by setting aside the impugned orders and allow the writ petitions. 12. In view of the above submissions, following the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(TR).No.2283 of 2017, dated 19.06.2023 and W.P.No.11821 of 2020 dated 06.01.2023 and in terms thereof, these Writ Petitions are allowed by setting aside proceedings in Rc.No.A3/780/94/VI, dated 10.07.1996; Memo No.864/SCD.Ser.A2/1019-1, dated 29.06.2019, proceedings in Rc.No.A3/780/94/XIV, dated 10.07.1996, Rc.No.A3/780/94, dated 05.04.1996, Rc.No.A3/780/94XXI, dated 10.07.1996, Rc.No. A1/621/2000-II(11), dated 07.11.2012, Rc.No.A3/780/94-95/IX, dated 23.07.1996, Rc.No.A3/780/94-95-XV, dated 03.07.1996, Memo No.50/SCD.Ser.A2/2019-2, dated 13.08.2019 and Rc.No.A3/780/94-95, dated 05.04.1996, respectively, and the consequential proceedings, if any. Consequently, the respondents are directed to take necessary action to release all retiral benefits, pending if any, including full pension to the petitioners in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand closed.