The main legal point established in the judgment is that any order passed at the instance of the higher authority, without the application of independent mind by the disciplinary authority, is illegal and unsustainable. The judgment also emphasizes that delay in disciplinary proceedings causes prejudice to the charged officer unless there is a proper explanation for the delay.

ORDER :

This writ petition has been filed seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned G.O. Rt.No.1385, Irrigation & C.A.D (Ser. VII.(V&E)A.1) Department dated 26.12.2012 issued by the 1st respondent in imposing a major penalty of cut in 2 increments with cumulative effect and set aside the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to accord all consequential benefits.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER:

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer on 09.04.1992 and subsequently he was promoted as Deputy Executive Engineer.

3. While so, the 1st respondent, Secretary to Government, Irrigation & C.A.D. Department, vide G.O. Rt. No.1611, dated 05.12.2006 had issued orders framing certain articles of charges and initiated the disciplinary proceedings for which, the petitioner submitted his explanation denying the article of charge. Statement of Article of Charge reads as under:

“As per specifications the compressive strength of C.C(1.2.4) with HGB grade metal will be 15.00 N/mm. But the test results are ranging from 5 to 10 N/mm which is much below than the allowable strength of individual core sample strength (75% of 15.00 N/mm) or average3 compressive strength (85% of 15.00 N/mm). These C.C. road bilts are liable for rejection. But the said Sri B.Shiv Prasad recorded for payment for these cement concrete road bits of “Laying of CC road over the existing WBM internal roads at Nandimalla (V) cross road and, at Mitta Nandimalla Erladinne (V) Rehabilitation and Resettlement centers of PJP left flank in Mhaboobnagar district” as standard works.”

4. Notwithstanding the fact of offering plausible explanation, the 1st respondent has chosen to proceed with the departmental enquiry by placing the matter before the Commissioner of Enquiries to inquire into the charges framed against the petitioner and vide G.O. Rt. No.744, dated 10.06.2008, one Sri Prasanth Mahapathra, I.A.S., Commissioner of Enquiries was appointed as inquiring authority and thereafter, one Sri Lingaraju Phanigarah, I.A.S., was appointed as Enquiry Officer vide G.O. Rt. No.788, dated 29.07.2011. It is submitted that the Commissioner of Enquiry conducted an inquiry and submitted a report on 24.09.2011 holding that the charges framed against the petitioner and other officers were not held proved. Thereafter, the 1st respondent, instead of dropping further action based on the report of the enquiring authority and its findings therein, has chosen to differ with the said findings stating that the Government has decided to deviate with the findings of the inquiry authority and issued a Memo dated 19.03.2012 communicating the reasons for disagreement with the findings of the Enquiry Officer duly enclosing the report for which also, the petitioner submitted an explanation requesting to drop further action. It is further submitted that though the petitioner has submitted plausible and convincing explanation, yet the 1st respondent, sticking on to the Vigilance report and without taking into consideration the quality assurance certificate issued by the concerned authorities, has chosen to impose punishment of a major penalty of cut in two increments with cumulative effect against the petitioner despite the charges were not proved during the course of inquiry conducted by the Commissioner of Inquiries. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS:

5. On behalf of the respondents, counter affidavit has been filed stating that it has been brought to the notice of the Government by the Vigilance and Enforcement Department vide their report dated 19.04.2006 that certain Engineers of I&CAD Department have committed irregularities in construction of School building compound wall and laying of cement concrete roads in Rehabilitation and Re-settlement centres in Priyadarshini Jurala Project, Mahaboobnagar district with a recommendation to initiate suitable departmen