IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J.
D. Rambabu – Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 15922 of 2020
Decided On : 08-02-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 16 and 311 - Post of Hostel Welfare Officer Grade - Services were regularized in the cadre - Petitioner was initially appointed as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II through the District Selection Committee and posted Probation was declared and his services were regularized in the cadre of HWO - Petitioner worked at Government SW Boys Hostel - Held, Collector and District Magistrate has ordered re-enquiry is still pending against the petitioner - Charges pending against the vide Proceedings Rc. expression referred to supra, respondents ought not to have declined to consider the case of petitioner on the ground of pendency of charges against the petitioner - Writ petition is disposed of
ORDER :
1. The petitioner, who is working as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II, filed the above writ petition seeking the following relief:
2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II (for short, HWO Gr.II) on 26.12.2005 through the District Selection Committee and posted at Nunna. Probation was declared and his services were regularized in the cadre of HWO Gr.II. The petitioner worked at Government SW Boys Hostel, Prakashnagar, Vijayawada from 11.6.2011 to 2017. The 2nd respondent issued orders in Rc. No. A1/09/2012, dated 04.9.2012 whereby the petitioner and two others were nominated for training at HRD Centre, Hyderabad from 08.10.2012 to 10.10.2012.
3. While the petitioner was in training, on 08.10.2012 the Vigilance and Enforcement Officers conducted surprise check. After eight months, they submitted appraisal report dated 12.6.2013. One year thereafter, the 1st respondent issued Charge Memo in Rc. No. A1/164/2014 dated 14.7.2014. The petitioner submitted explanation on 30.7.2014 denying all the charges. The 1st respondent appointed Special Grade Deputy Collector, Polavaram Project, Vijayawada as Enquiry Officer and Assistant Social Welfare Officer, Vijayawada (Urban) as Presenting Officer. Notice was issued to the petitioner to appear before the Enquiry Officer on 24.6.2016. No action has been taken by the respondents for the last eight years.
4. The post of HWO is governed by the Social Welfare Subordinate Services Rules issued in G.O.Ms. No. 189 Social Welfare (A.2) Department dated 31.12.1997. The post of HWO Gr.I falls under Class-A and Category-3 of Rule 2 of the above said Rules. Method of recruitment to the post of HWO Gr.I, as per Rule 3, is by promotion from the Category-4 of Class-A. The post of HWO Gr.I is a non-selection post and it should be filled from the candidates of HWO Gr.II strictly as per seniority.
5. Disciplinary proceedings, initiated against an employee, are to be completed within three months in simple cases and six months in complicated cases as per G.O.Ms. No. 679, General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008. As per the list of seniority in the cadre of HWO Gr.II, as on 01.1.2019, the name of the petitioner is shown at serial No. 15 and the persons below him in the list and juniors to him were given promotion as HWO Gr.I by the 1st respondent in Proceedings Rc. No. A1/124/2018-17 dated 08.2.2019 ignoring the case of the petitioner on the ground of pendency of departmental proceedings in Charge Memo in Rc. No. A1/164/2014 dated 14.7.2014. However, in view of the objections received, the promotions were kept in abeyance. Another list of HWOs were prepared in which the name of the petitioner was shown at Serial No. 8 and his juniors were shown at Serial Nos. 9 to 17, 19 to 31, 33, 40 and 51 to 56, and some others were given pr
A.P. Naidu vs. The General Manager, South Central Railway
Denial of promotion based on mere inquiry without formal charges is arbitrary and violates the right to be considered for promotion under Article 16(1).
Point of law: Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 are silent as to the exact date of initiation of disciplinary proceedings. But the proceedings prescribed ....
An employee has right for consideration for promotion, but has no right to ask promotion as a matter of course
Promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right when a criminal case is pending against an employee, despite the right to be considered for promotion.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.