Back
2016 Supreme(AP) 116
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAMAMOHANA RAO & ANIS, JJ.
A. Kishan – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Chief Secretary Secretariat Buildings & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 17429 of 2015
Decided On : 14-03-2016
For the Petitioner:K. Sudhakar Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondents: R1, B. Narayana Reddy, Assistant Solicitor General, R2, G.P. for G.A.D (T.G).
Headnote:
All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 - Rule 3(1) (b) - Indian Forest Service of 1990 - Writ petition is instituted by a member of Indian Forest Service calling in question correctness of orders passed by Central Administrative Tribunal instituted by him for quashing order of suspension passed by State Government - Petitioner belongs to Indian Forest Service of batch and while was working as Conservator of Forests was placed suspension through orders contained in General Administration Department - However said order has not been confirmed by Central Government within maximum period of days allowed for said purpose - Central Administrative Tribunal it is urged without any serious application has declined to grant relief prayed for and instead thrown writ petitioner to mercy of State Government - Held, In instant case Assistant Solicitor General has clearly brought out that such a report has been submitted to Central Government on - Since Sub Rule specified time limit by using expression ordinarily no exception need be taken with regard to report submitted against petitioner by Government of State on which actually fell a couple of days beyond fifteen days period – Hence State Government in instant case complied with requirement of Sub Rule sets out that an order of suspension made or deemed to have been made Rule shall continue to remain in force until it is modified or revoked by authority competent to do so and any suspension may be modified or revoked by authority which made it at any time also - Petition dismissed
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.
This writ petition is instituted by a member of the Indian Forest Service, calling in question the correctness of the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A.No.832 of 2014 instituted by him for quashing the order of suspension passed by the State Government vide G.O.Ms.No.342 General Administrative Department dated 13.05.2013 as the same is contrary to Rule 3(1) (b) of The All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969.
Sri K. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that the petitioner belongs to Indian Forest Service of 1990 batch and while he was working as the Conservator of Forests, he was placed under suspension through the orders contained in G.O.Ms.No.342 General Administration (SC.D) Department dated 16.05.2013. However, the said order has not been confirmed by the Central Government within the maximum period of 90 days allowed for the said purpose. Hence, the said order shall not be treated as valid in view of the clear language employed in Rule 3(1)(b) of The All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969. It was also contended that the report as is required in terms of Rule 3(6)(A) of the aforementioned rules is also not placed before the Central Government. The Central Administrative Tribunal, it is urged, without any serious application has declined to grant the relief prayed for and instead thrown the writ petitioner to the mercy of the State Government.
Sri B. Narayana Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor General would contend that, since no confirmation is solicited by the State Government, order of confirmation of the order of suspension has not been passed by the Central Government. However, the State Government has sent a report on 04.06.2013 for information of the Central Government in terms of Rule 3(6)(A) of the aforementioned rules and since the same does not require any confirmation from the Central Government, no specific orders have been passed. Since the State has not sought for any approval, the Central Government has not passed any approval order.
Before proceeding further, it is apt to take note of the first three paragraphs of the order passed by the State Government in their G.O.Ms.No.342 General Administration (SC.D) Department dated 16.05.2013, which runs as under:
“Whereas, it was brought to notice of the Government of Andhra Pradesh that Sri A. Kishan, IFS(90), while working as Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Women’s Co-operative Finance Corporation, Hyderabad has misused his official position to create and issue FDR illegally and fraudulently in the name of the Corporation and collected deposits from the general public and siphoned off the entire amount.
2. And, whereas, a case against Sri A. Kishan, IFS(90), formerly Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Women’s Co-operative Finance Corporation, Hyderabad and presently Conservator of Forests (MIS), office of Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HoFF), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in respect of the above criminal office is under investigation/inquiry.
3. Now, therefore, Government of Andhra Pradesh, in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 of All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1969, hereby place the said Sri A. Kishan, IFS(90), formerly Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Women’s Co-operative Finance Corporation, Hyderabad and presently Conservator of Forests (MIS), office of Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad under suspension with immediate effect pending inquiry/investigation.”
Thus, the composite State Government of Andhra Pradesh passed the aforementioned order placing the writ petitioner under suspension under Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 3 of The All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1963, as, the alleged involvement of the petitioner in criminal offence is under investigation/inquiry. It is the validity of the above order which is the principal question that eng
