R. Subhash Reddy, J.

1. This writ petition is filed by the respondents in OANo.6097 of 2009 aggrieved of order dated 5.7.2012, passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, allowing the said O.A., filed by the 1st respondent herein under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, by setting aside the order dated 6.4.2009 passed in G.O. Rt. No.285 Higher Education (VC.II) Department, by which the punishment of withholding of pension, gratuity in full permanently, besides recovery of Rs.1,69,160/-, is ordered against 1st respondent herein.

2. The 1st respondent-applicant was working as Prinicipal in Government Junior College for Girls, waddepally and retired from service on 30.6.1999 on attaining the age of superannuation. After his retirement, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and charge memo dated 20.9.1999 was issued by framing two charges. It is alleged in the first charge that while working as Principal during the year 1998-99, he has violated the orders of the competent authority and collected money from the students irrationally. Second charge is that he misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,69,100/- in the name of Part-Time Junior Lecturers without extracting work. On completion of enquiry in the disciplinary preceedings, show-cause notice dated 7.5.2005 was issued by the Government directing him to show-cause as to why penalty of 2% cut in pension for a period of two years besides recovery of Rs.1,69,160/-should not be imposed on him. He submitted explanation but no final orders are passed in the disciplinary proceedings. Thereafter, further show-cause notice is issued on 5.3.2007 to show-cause as to why the penalty of withholding of entire pensionary benefits, i.e., withholding of entire pension and gratuity permanently besides recovery of Rs.1,69,160/-, should not be imposed. He filed explanation to the said show-cause notice. Thereafter, final orders are passed vide G.O. Rt. No.285 Higher Education (VC.II) Department dated 6.4.2009 imposing on him the punishment of withholding of pension, gratuity in full permanently, besides recovery of Rs.1,69,160/-.

3. Against the said order, the 1st respondent-applicant has filed the O.A. in question before the Tribunal. It was his case before the Tribunal that the order dated 6.4.2009 passed by the Government is contrary to Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980. It was his further case that the charge memo was issued under Rule 20 of the A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 and the same are not applicable in view of his retirement from service, on 30.6.1999. It was also his case that having issued show-cause notice on 7.5.2005 proposing to impose penalty of 2% cut in pension, the authorities are not empowered to issue further notice proposing to modify the punishment to that of withholding entire pensionary benefits, i.e., withholding of entire pension and gratuity permanently besides recovery of Rs.1,69,160/-. The Tribunal by recording a finding that the procedure adopted by the petitioners herein is contrary to Rule 9 of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980 and serious procedural irregularity is committed in the disciplinary procedure and further recording a finding that no powers are conferred on the authorities to issue second show-cause notice without cancelling the first show-cause notice dated 7.5.2005, allowed the application, by the impugned order and set aside the order dated 6.4.2009 passed in G.O. Rt. No.285 Higher Education (VC.II) Department. Questioning the said order of the Tribunal, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the petitioners and Sri M. Ratna Reddy learned Counsel for the 1st respondent.

5. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for the petitioners that after completion of the enquiry, before passing final orders, show-cause notice is issued by the Government. Therefore, it cannot be said