G. YETHIRAJULU, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this court dated 1-9-1998 in W. P. No. 12916 of 1990 by granting the relief in the nature of certiorari setting aside the order of punishment imposed by the appellate authority against the writ petitioner on the ground that he produced a fabricated letter in support of his false claim as a Scheduled tribe candidate.

( 2 ) THE respondents in the writ petition being aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge preferred this appeal challenging its validity and legality.

( 3 ) ON 11-4-1977 the writ petitioner was appointed as a clerk in Canara Bank in the quota meant for Scheduled Tribe candidates on production of a false certificate that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe. His probation was declared on 11-10-1977. Subsequently he was promoted to Officer Grade and was also confirmed in the said cadre on 18-4-1985. In the year 1985 the Bank received an anonymous complaint that the petitioner does not belong to Scheduled Tribe. The bank forwarded the said complaint to the collector, West Godavari District for necessary enquiry. The writ petitioner pleaded that he belongs to medari caste and claims that it falls under Scheduled tribe and denied the production of a false certificate. On 20-11-1998 the Collector issued a notice to the writ petitioner calling upon him to explain as to why the certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 20-2-1977 should not be cancelled. Subsequently the Collector sent a letter to the Bank stating that the petitioner does not belong to Scheduled tribe. On receipt of the said letter, the Bank kept the petitioner under suspension. Aggrieved by the order of suspension, the petitioner filed W. P. No. 16918 of 1988 before this High Court and it was disposed of with a direction to conduct enquiry within three months. Thereupon the Bank issued a charge sheet, enquiry was conducted and ultimately he was imposed with a punishment of removal from service through the order dated 21-5-1990. Against the said order the writ petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority i. e. , the 2nd appellant herein and it was ultimately rejected on 17-8-1990. The petitioner filed the writ petition in which the impugned order was passed by the learned Single Judge, challenging the order of punishment imposed by the 1st appellant and confirmed by the 2nd appellant. He took number of grounds contending that the enquiry was unwarranted, that it was vitiated for violation of the principles of natural justice and that the findings of the enquiry officer are wholly untenable and based on no evidence.

( 4 ) THE learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition observed that even though two separate charge sheets were issued setting out two charges, one for production of false caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar and the other for production of false letter purported to be issued by the collector. West Godavari District, the contents of the charges is a decisive factor. The production of false communication dated 20-5-1985 has no relevance in the context of the matter. The learned single judge further observed that if the charge of producing false certificate is not proved, the false letter becomes inconsequential and the said charge pales into insignificance. The learned Judge also observed that even if the charge is proved, the ancillary charge loses its force and becomes redundant. The learned Judge also observed that there is no answer from the Bank as to why it did not proceed with the principle charge of obtaining employment by producing false scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate and why it embarked upon most insignificant and irrelevant charge of producing a false letter purported to be given by the Collector. Ultimately the learned Single Judge held that the enquiry conducted against the writ petitioner is vitiated and consequentially the order of punishment imposed on him was set aside.

( 5 ) IN the light of the findi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document