Disciplinary proceedings abate upon the death of the employee, and sufficient evidence must support removal actions to ensure legality.

Order :

Ninala Jayasurya, J.

Aggrieved by the order of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad dated 08.10.2018 in O.A.No.2846 of 2014, the present writ petition is filed.

2. The 1^st respondent / applicant filed the said O.A., to declare the order of the 2^nd respondent dated 05.02.2011 and the consequential orders of the Government /4^th respondent therein dated 15.04.2013 confirming the decision of the 2^nd respondent for removal of the applicant from service as illegal, arbitrary etc.

3. Along with O.A.No.2846 of 2014, the learned Tribunal vide common order dated 08.10.2018, disposed of Review M.A.No.1493 of 2014 in O.A.No.5431 of 2013 filed by the very same applicant.

4. Heard Mr.G.V.L.N.Murthy, learned Government Pleader for the writ petitioners / respondents in O.A.No.2846 of 2014 and Mr.K.S.Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3, who was brought on record as legal representative of the deceased – respondent No.1/applicant. Perused the material on record.

5. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’).Before dealing with the arguments advanced by the learned counsel, the brief facts of the case may be narrated thus :

6. Based on a News item published in Andhra Jyothi that the Library in Nidamarru branch is not functioning properly, the applicant Mr.K.V.Raghava Rao, Librarian (Grade-III) was placed under suspension vide Proceedings dated 07.07.2008. Subsequently, the 2^nd respondent through Proceedings dated 24.11.2008 revoked the suspension order and reinstated the applicant into service, subject to disciplinary action to be initiated against the applicant.

7. One Mr.K.Gangadhar Rao was initially appointed as an Enquiry Officer, who issued a Charge Memo to the applicant. However, as he retired from service, another Enquiry Officer Mr.V.T.D.Nagesh was appointed and on 25.10.2009, the Second Enquiry Officer submitted an Enquiry Report holding that all the charges were proved against the applicant. Pursuant to the said Enquiry Report, the 2^nd respondent issued a Show Cause Notice dated 05.12.2009 to the applicant to show cause as to why he shall not be removed from service. The applicant submitted reply / objections dated 31.08.2010 and thereafter vide Proceedings dated 05.02.2011, the 2^nd respondent / Chairman - The Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha withdrew the proposed punishment of removal of the applicant on humanitarian grounds, subject to :

1. Relaxation of G.O.Ms.No.260 GAD dt. 04.09.2003 and Rule 5 (a) of ANDHRA PRADESH LEAVE RULES 1933 and FR 18 (a) in favour of Sri K.V.Raghava Rao by the Government.

2. Recovery of Rs.3,41,591/- from Sri K.V.Raghava Rao in monthly installments.

3. Imposing of any penalty within the purview of the Secretary on Sri K.V.Raghava Rao.

8. The Government vide Memo dated 15.04.2013, rejected the request for relaxation of Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.260 GAD dated 04.09.2003. The Government also reviewed the disciplinary case of the applicant, concurred with the original decision of the 2^nd respondent to remove the applicant from service and advised the 2^nd respondent to act accordingly. The 2^nd respondent pursuant to the said Memo, issued Proceedings dated 25.05.2013 directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.3,41,591/- towards the loss sustained by the Zilla Grandhalaya Samstha.

9. Challenging the Proceedings dated 25.05.2013, the applicant filed O.A.No.54