Bigamous marriage is prohibited under Regulation 4(xxi) of the APSEB Regulations, and customary divorce claims must be proven to negate such allegations.

JUDGMENT :

A. Hari Haranadha Sarma, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.11.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.3371 of 2008. Appellant No.1 is the unsuccessful writ petitioner. Upon his demise during the pendency of the writ appeal, appellant Nos.2 to 4 were brought on record as his legal representatives.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties will be hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner and the respondents, with reference to their description in the writ petition.

3. The termination of the writ petitioner from the service under order dated 29.01.2008 passed by the 2^nd respondent is questioned in the writ petition, as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

4. The charge leading to dismissal of the petitioner from the service is that he has indulged in immoral conduct by marrying more number of times, while another wife is alive, and not taking care of his wife one Smt. Satyavathi.

5. The case against the petitioner is that one Smt.Satyavathi lodged a complaint against the writ petitioner alleging that the petitioner had earlier married one Smt.Ramalakshmi, who is her sister, and that they were residing at Donkarai, where the petitioner was working. It is further alleged that Smt. Satyavathi, went to Donkarai in the year 1981, where that the petitioner developed illegal intimacy with her and subsequently married her. The said Smt.Satyavathi had also obtained household supply card issued from the Mandal Revenue Officer, Alamuru, along with writ petitioner. It is also alleged that the writ petitioner is not taking care of her. Earlier, the writ petitioner had married one Baby Padmavathi without the knowledge of the complainant-Smt. Satyavathi, he has also married one Lakshmi. The complaint of Smt.Satyavathi has resulted in further enquiry and consequently charged against the petitioner that he has indulged immoral conduct of marrying more number of times, while his spouse is alive. A detailed enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer found that the writ petitioner is guilty of Regulation 4(xxi) of the APSEB Employees Revised Conduct Regulations (hereinafter for short the „Regulations‟). A show-cause notice was issued on 01.10.2007 and the petitioner submitted his explanation on 01.12.2007. Thereafter, the final orders were passed on 29.01.2008, dismissing the petitioner from service, which is questioned in the writ petition.

6. The contentions of the writ petitioner are that

(i) Charges are not true.

(ii) The petitioner has put in 37 years of long service.

(iii) G.O.Ms.No.2, General Administration (SER.C) Department, dated 04.01.1999, was adopted by the TRANSCO and the same is not binding on the petitioner.

(iv) There is no proof of bigamy.

(v) The complainant/Smt.Satyavathi is wife of Manyam Balaiah. The allegation that he has married one Ramalakshmi, sister of Satyavathi, is not correct.

(vi) Smt.Satyavathi failed in litigation covered by M.C.No.2 of 1994 on the file of learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Domestic Violence Case and in a litigation covered in O.S.No.247 of 1997 on the file of learned District Munsif Court, Alamuru, filed by one Relangi Venkata Swamy, in that one Smt.Satyavathi was described as wife of Balaiah. She also described herself in her deposition in appeal proceedings as wife of Balaiah. Therefore, Satyavathi is never wife of petitioner.

(vii) Further, specific case of the petitioner is that he married one Baby Padmavathi on 17.08.1984. Subsequently, as she was mentally ill, after obtaining customary divorce, he has married one Lakshmi on 12.12