1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of Certiorari by calling the records and to quash the Proceedings of the first respondent dated 31.8.2004 by declaring the same as arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to extend all service benefits to the petitioner as a Junior Accounts Officer.

2. The facts germane to the filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:

3. The petitioner joined the service of the State Electricity Board as Typist in the year 1971 after due process of selection. By virtue of seniority, the petitioner was promoted as L.D.C in the year 1992 after passing the Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Part I. In order to get promotion as Junior Accounts Officer, the requisite qualification is graduation in Commerce or Accountancy High Grade Examination. The petitioner appeared for B.Com examination conducted by Andhra University, vide Registered No.10933 but could not get the degree certificate from the University. The petitioner also appeared for B.Com examination conducted by Ranchi University through Study Centre in February 1993 with Registered No.30836. In the year 2000 the petitioner submitted a copy of B.Com Degree certificate of Andhra University requesting the respondent authorities for making appropriate entries in his Service Register. While being so, on suspicion, the respondents initiated enquiry with regard to the genuineness of the B.Com Degree certificate produced by the petitioner, by placing him under suspension, vide order dated 12.04.2003 and appointed the Divisional Engineer, Enquiries, as enquiry officer. After conducting a detailed enquiry and by affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, the enquiry officer submitted a report stating that the charge levelled against the petitioner was proved. The petitioner was given a show cause notice calling his explanation as to why he should not be removed from service for the alleged misconduct to which the petitioner submitted his explanation. Being not satisfied with the same, the second respondent passed final order dismissing the petitioner from service, vide proceedings dated 31.08.2004. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the first respondent, which was dismissed.

4. The respondents filed common counter denying all the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, inter alia, contending that the findings recorded by the enquiry officer are based on the letters submitted by the Universities. The petitioner, by producing fake certificates, cheated the organization, which is misconduct under Regulation 4 (xxxix) of APSEB Employees Revised Conduct Regulations as adopted by APEPDCL and warrants disciplinary action as per Rule 6 (xxx) of APSEB & D & A Regulations as adopted by APEPDCL. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this Writ Petition and hence the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Sri Vedula Srinivas, the learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner was kept under suspension without following due process and that itself is sufficient to vitiate the enquiry. He would further submit that the findings recorded by the enquiry officer have no nexus to the charges levelled against the petitioner. It is his further submission that non-supply of the copies of the letters alleged to have been received from the concerned Universities would amount to violation of principles of natural justice. He lastly contended that the findings recorded by the enquiry officer are perverse, therefore, it is a fit case to quash the enquiry report by invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner secured promotion by producing fake Degree certificate and the same