Back
2025 Supreme(AP) 320
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
K.subramanya Reddy - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others - Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 1010/2022
Decided On : 10-01-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI
For the Respondent: GP FOR SERVICES
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, requiring evidence and reasoned decisions, especially when imposing severe penalties.
Headnote:
(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, and 21 - Writ of Mandamus - Dismissal from service - The petitioner, a driver, was dismissed after being accused of collusion with smugglers. The disciplinary proceedings were delayed and lacked evidence, violating principles of natural justice. The court found the dismissal arbitrary and reinstated the petitioner with benefits. (Paras 1, 5, 15, 16)
(B) Disciplinary Proceedings - The court emphasized that disciplinary authorities must provide reasons for their decisions, especially when severe penalties are imposed. The absence of evidence and reliance on conjecture rendered the dismissal invalid. (Paras 8, 15)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was dismissed after allegations of collusion with smugglers, following a lengthy disciplinary process that lacked timely evidence and proper inquiry.
Findings of Court:
The court found the dismissal arbitrary due to lack of evidence and failure to adhere to principles of natural justice.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the dismissal and the adequacy of the inquiry process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the disciplinary authority's findings were based on conjecture and lacked evidentiary support, violating the principles of natural justice.
Result: Writ Petition allowed; dismissal set aside, and petitioner reinstated with benefits.
Order:
K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
“…..to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent in proceedings Rc.No.327/2014/GS, Dt.24.08.2017 and consequential proceedings of rejection of appeal by the 3rd respondent in Rc.No.1662/2017/M2, Dt.Nil.05.2019 and orders of Revision passed by the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.6182/2019/A&DC-1, Dt.24.12.2019 and Rejection order of Mercy Petition, Dt.21.09.2021 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from the settled principle of law laid down by the Apex Court regarding conduct of disciplinary enquiry and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled for reinstatement into service with all consequential benefits…….”
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Driver under the respondents in the year 1991 and was working as such till dismissed from service on 24.08.2017 by the 4th respondent. While the petitioner was working as Driver in the office of Sub-divisional Forest Officer, Tirupati, he was placed under suspension on 11.02.2014 on the ground that the petitioner colluded with the red sanders smugglers by collecting bribe. After a period of 20 months, the petitioner was issued with a charge memo dated 26.09.2015 framing lone Article of Charge and that the petitioner was arrested for the same offence by the police of M.R.Palli Police Station. The petitioner has submitted his explanation dated 17.10.2015 to the 4th respondent and the disciplinary authority had appointed a presenting officer vide proceedings dated 01.01.2016 in Rc.No.327/2014/GS. Thereafter, the enquiry was conducted on 09.01.2016, 23.01.2016 and 29.01.2016 without any progress in the enquiry proceedings. Subsequently, again the petitioner was called for enquiry on 13.03.2017 and enquiry proceedings were concluded on the same day and thereafter, enquiry report had been communicated to the petitioner in May 2017, for which the petitioner had submitted final explanation in detail on 12.05.2017. Even though the enquiry was completed, the suspension of the petitioner had also been extended again, where under the petitioner was continued under suspension for more than three years. The 4th respondent vide proceedings Rc.No.327/2014/GS, dated 24.08.2017 issued orders of major penalty of dismissal from service. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal on 17.10.2017 before the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent after two years, rejected the appeal vide proceedings Rc.No.1662/2017/M2, dated Nil.05.2019. Questioning the same, the petitioner filed revision before the 2nd respondent on 18.06.2019. The 2nd respondent rejected the revision vide proceedings dated 24.12.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Mercy Petition before the Government, which was disposed of on 21.09.2021 vide Memo No.2514/Sec.IV/A2/2018 by the 1st respondent, which was communicated to the petitioner in third week of October, 2021. Questioning the inaction of the respondents in reinstating the petitioner into service, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The 4th respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and stated that the police arrested the persons namely one Venkatesh, Viod Kumar and Doraswamy Venkatesh, while they were transporting 9 red sander logs, weight of 244 kgs in Mahendra Xylo Car bearing No.TN02AN and the police authorities seized the car. During investigation of the said accused, they informed the name of the petitioner, who is helping them for this smuggling of Red Sander activities, for which the petitioner has taken bribe of Rs.2,00,000/- per load. It is further stated that the petitioner had himself accepted that he has colluded with the RS smugglers. Hence, the petitioner was placed under suspension as p
