LNR, J.

1. The petitioner joined the service of the Irrigation and Command Area Development in the Government of Andhra Pradesh as Junior Engineer. He retired from service on 31.05.2006 as Executive Engineer. Seven months thereafter i.e., on 31.01.2007, the 1st respondent issued G.O.Rt.No.128, Irrigation & CAD (Ser.VII(V&E-2) Department, framing certain charges against the petitioner. Provisional pension was released to him. An Enquiry Officer was appointed and after conducting a detailed enquiry into the charges framed against the petitioner, he submitted a report on 18.08.2010, holding that the charges were not proved. However, the 1st respondent has taken a provisional decision to differ with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. Accordingly, it has issued a Memo, dated 14.07.2011, requiring the petitioner to explain, as to why a different view be not taken on the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer. The petitioner claims to have submitted his reply to the same.

2. The petitioner filed O.A.No.4740 of 2011 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, 5th respondent, with a prayer to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to release the retirement benefits with intere