( 1 ) WRIT petition No. 29418 of 1997 is filed to quash the proceeding of the 3rd respondent dated 31-10-1992 confirmed, in appeal, by the order of the 2nd respondent dated 15/18. 3. 1993. The 3rd respondent, vide proceedings dated 31-10-1992, had imposed stoppage of five increments forever on the petitioner and the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the punishment imposed on him was confirmed.

( 2 ) IN W. P. No. 28763 of 1997, the proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 21-5-1997, whereby the petitioner was informed that the result of the sealed cover, containing the findings in respect of his suitability or otherwise for promotion to officers Cadre in JMGS-I had been annulled consequent to the punishment, of stoppage of five increments forever, imposed on him vide disciplinary authority s order dated 31-10-1992 and that the results of his promotion cannot be given effect to in terms of Clause VI of the sealed cover procedure prescribed in circular No. PER/71 of 1983 dated 7. 9. 1993, is impugned.

( 3 ) SINCE the punishment imposed vide proceedings dated 31. 10. 1992, which forms the basis for his being denied promotion to the post of Officer JMGS-I, is challenged in W. P. No. 29418 of 1997, it is this writ petition which shall be first be taken up for consideration.

( 4 ) FACTS, to the extent necessary for this writ petition, are that the petitioner was directly recruited as Cashier-cum-Clerk in the year 1982 by the Regional Recruitment board of the State Bank of Hyderabad. He was initially appointed in the Dubbak branch, Medak District, and successfully completed his probation. The 4th respondent, issued memo dated 30-9-1988, alleging that the petitioner had drawn salary upto 31-7-1982 from A. P. S. R. T. C. , Kamareddy depot although he had joined the service of the Bank on 1-7-1982 itself and had drawn salary thereafter from the State bank of Hyderabad. It was also alleged that the petitioner had joined the Bank service without tendering his resignal on to apsrtc. The petitioner submitted his explanation thereto on 25-10-1988. The 4th respondent issued another memo dated 16-1-1991, to which the petitioner is said to have submitted his explanation on 2-3-1991. A charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 10-6-1991 framing three charges for acts of misconduct alleged to have been committed by the petitioner while he was working as Cashier-cum-Clerk at Dubbak branch, Medak District. It is the petitioner s case that he was not furnished with a copy of the complaint based on which the charges were framed against him. An enquiry was ordered and proceedings were held on 11-11-1991, 5-12-1991, 24-12-1991 and 5-2-1992 to enquire into the charges levelled against the petitioner. During the enquiry, one witness Sri K. Srihari, Deputy superintendent (Personnel), APSRTC, kamareddy Depot was examined and four documents were marked as exhibits. In his defence, the petitioner s statement was recorded. Petitioner contends that copies of documents, relied upon by the enquiry officer and marked as exhibits, were not furnished to him and that soon after the enquiry was completed the presenting Officer had submitted his brief and he had submitted his defence brief on 22-6-1992. The enquiry officer, in his report, held that the petitioner had accepted charge No. 1, charge No. 2 was partly established and charge No. 3 was not established. On the basis of the enquiry report, wherein the petitioner was held guilty of the charges leveled against him, a show-cause notice dated 22-9-1992 was issued proposing to impose penalty of stoppage of five increments forever and calling upon the petitioner to show-cause against the proposed punishment. Petitioner submitted his reply to the show-cause notice on 9-10-1992, consequent to which the impugned proceedings dated 31-10-1992 was issued imposing the punishment of stoppage of five increments forever.

( 5 ) SRI G. Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document