Point of Law: suspension must be a step in aid to the ultimate result of the investigation or inquiry. The authority also should keep in mind public interest of the impact of the delinquent’s continuance in office while facing departmental inquiry or trial of a criminal charge

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing proceedings in Rc.No.V1/20022/1/ 2020-4 dated 22.02.202 directing the 3rd respondent to take action for suspending the petitioner and others and consequential suspension proceedings of 3rd respondent A1/228/2021/11 dated 22.02.2021 as bad, illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of principles of natural justice, mechanical, non-application of mind and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same.

2. Petitioner was initially appointed as Attender on 26.12.2001. Thereafter, he was promoted as Record Assistant on 23.05.2012, Junior Assistant on 24.05.2014 and Senior Assistant on 12.02.2019 and working as Senior Assistant as on date. In the year 2019, he was allotted to duties in “Festival Section” and after working for one year, he was allotted the duties in “Sarees Section” in the year 2020. Since then, he was working in “Sarees Section”. The following are the duties, the petitioner has to discharge in the “Sarees Section”.

a. Godown Incharge

b. Receiving and issuing Sarees

c. Maintaining the file work

3. The procedure being followed in the temple is that if any saree is donated to the Diety, the same will be deposited in the saree receiving counter situated in the main temple premises at 7th floor. Thereafter, the saree will be scanned along with bar code and photograph will be taken. Thereafter, the same will be carried by one Sambaiah from 7th floor to godown which is in the 5th floor. The same shall be received by the petitioner and keep the same in the godown for safe custody. If the Vydic Committee request for any saree the same will be given, after the indent is released by the Executive Officer for performance of Poojas and other ritual to the goddess.

4. While matter stood thus, the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) conducted a surprise check on 18.02.2021 in the temple premises and as per their Radio Message two points were found against the petitioner and on the basis of the same, the petitioner was placed under suspension. The following are the two alleged irregularities committed by the petitioner in discharging his duties:

“a. Two Pattu Sarees were not found in Sarees Godown of Rs.7000/-and Rs.3500/-.

b. On verification of Pattu Sarees on Barcode scanner, found two sarees of Rs.15000/-and Rs.2500/-the bar coding was not matched.”

5. Based on the two alleged irregularities attributed to this petitioner in utmost haste without properly verifying the records and applying the mind, the order impugned in the writ petition was passed. It is specifically contended that relating to saree worth Rs.3,500/-an indent was raised as per the orders of the Executive Officer on 04.02.2021 basing on which an entry was made in the sarees issue register at page No.81 and the same was sent to the Vydic Committee by making an endorsement PAT-210122000004 Dt. 22.01.2021 as such the same is not misappropriated.

6. Regarding Rs.7,000/-Pattu Saree is concerned, the same is available in godown but the bar code scanner was separated from the saree and detached to it without proper verification.

7. It is further contended that, non matching of bar code amount of Rs.15000/-and Rs.2500/-is not the fault of the petitioner because it is the person in the receiving counter has to take the photograph of the saree and scan the bar code. The sarees are very much available but the photos taken by the receiving counter does not match. Hence, it is not his mistake. Finally, it is contended that there is no allegation against this petitioner except the technical issues for which suspension is unwarranted and the suspension order was challenged on the following grounds:

a. The second respondent has no jurisdiction to direct the third respondent to suspend the petitioner as per Section 37 of Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Instit