ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare.

2. This petition is filed by the petitioner to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the petitioner’s representation in setting aside the order passed by the disciplinary authority vide proceedings Rc No.Z-V/Estt./8118/2004, dated 01.10.2010 in dismissing the petitioner from service and appellate authority in confirming the same in Agenda No.14 of the 56th Board of Governors, Meeting held on 12.09.2011 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service forthwith with all consequential benefits.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief, is as follows:

a) Petitioner had been kept under suspension vide order dt. 08.06.2004 vide Proceedings Rc.No.Prl.Estt/8118/2004 on the alleged ground that the preliminary enquiry conducted by the Deputy Secretary on 30.05.2004 found out there are financial irregularities and other administrative lapses.

b) Petitioner was reinstated into service on 14.04.2005 after 11 months without conducting any enquiry. Respondents issued a 8 charge, articles of charges against the petitioner.

c) The petitioner submitted a detailed explanation denying all the 8 alleged charges framed against the petitioner by the respondents.

d) Without considering the said explanation, respondents appointed one of petitioner’s junior Smt C.V.B.Laxmi, who holds 12th rank in the Principals seniority list, (while the petitioner is a 11th rank holder in the principals seniority list dated 30.08.2008), as Enquiry Officer, which is against the Rule 20 of CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1996 and as per Sub-rule 6, competent authority shall appoint Enquiry Officer, who shall be superior in rank to the delinquent employee as an Enquiry Officer.

e) The Enquiry Officer without conducting any enquiry submitted enquiry report which has no validity. The enquiry officer had questioned the genuineness of the bills submitted by the petitioner and held the charges against the petitioner as proved.

f) On 06.06.2007 petitioner requested the authorities to provide an opportunity to trace out some of the bills and vouchers which were not traced during the enquiry. But, the authorities issued a memo vide Rc.No.CO.I/PROLS/8118/2004 dt. 08.01.2008 instructing the petitioner to submit the vouchers/bills on or before 25.01.2008. Petitioner attended the Head Office on 25.01.2008 and only then the above dated memo was handed over to the petitioner.

g) When the petitioner had gone to APSWRIS/JC, Mallapur, Karimnagar, to trace out the bills the incharge Principal denied to show the records as the Principal did not receive any instructions from the authorities.

h) The 3rd respondent issued orders vide Proc. Rc.No.Zone-V/Estt/8118/2004, dt. 01.10.2010 imposed the major punishment of dismissal from service without issuing show cause notice, even though the same has been mandated by the Rules.

i) Pending proceedings the petitioner was posted at APSW RS/JC (Boys) Koheda and the said Institution had a section of intermediate MPC students along with the students of school section and later on the Institution was upgraded to a college with both MPC and BiPC groups, due to which the strength of Institution enhanced from 414 to 640 students.

j) The petitioner was later dismissed based on the submissions of the enquiry officer vide Proc. Rc.No.Zone-V/Estt/8118/2004, dt. 01.10.2010. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an Appeal before the Appellate Authority, but the Appellate Authority without taking into consideration any of the grounds raised by the petitioner rejected the Appeal relying on the enquiry officer’s report.

k) The petitioner also made an appeal to the Chief Minister’s Office, Hyderabad and the said office issued a note No.14671/GEN-GP/2011, dated 21.11.2021 and vide Note No.635/GEN-EM/2012, dated