IMPORTANT POINT
In the absence of disciplinary proceedings before the death of a government employee, recovery orders for alleged misappropriation of funds cannot be sustained, and the G.O.Ms.No.85, Finance and Planning (FIN.WING-Pen-I) Department, dtd. 12/7/1999 is not applicable.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner Late Sri J.Yohan, who worked as Head of the Department in Mechanical Engineering at Government Polytechnic, Kosgi, Narayanpet District was expired while in service on 8/6/2021. The petitioner consequent on death of her husband, submitted an application to the concerned authorities to sanction family pension and release terminal/ death-cum-retirement benefits duly enclosing all the relevant documents as per Telangana Revised Pension Rules, 1980. While it being so, surprisingly, the respondent No.2 issued impugned proceedings of recovery of Rs.53,61,878.00 from Terminal benefits of husband of the petitioner on 29/10/2022 as the husband of the petitioner misappropriated the said amounts and stated that the impugned orders issued as per G.O.Ms.No.85, Finance and Planning (FIN.WINGPen. I) Department, dtd. 12/7/1999.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned recovery orders passed by the respondent No.2 basing on the Special Audit conducted at Government Polytechnic for Women, Jogipet, Sangareddy District found some discrepancies in accounting system in connection with claiming of the bills from 2014-2018, when the husband of the petitioner worked as OSD in the said college.

4. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits as per the G.O.Ms.No.85, Finance & Planning (FIN.WING-Pen-I) Department, dtd. 12/7/1999, the terminal benefits of husband of the petitioner cannot be recovered by the authorities. In the said G.O., the Para No.7(a) states that when a Government servant dies before conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, consequent on the death of Government employee, any disciplinary proceedings will not automatically abates and the same cannot apply to the instant case as the respondents have not initiated any disciplinary proceedings before death of the husband of the petitioner.

5. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the family members of the petitioner made application under Right to Information Act for particulars about the disciplinary proceedings pending against the late husband of the petitioner. In response to the same, the respondents given reply on 19/11/2022 and there is no mentioning about the departmental proceedings against the petitioner and stating that there are recoveries as per the orders from the Civil Courts for the housing loan and also mentioning the present impugned orders. There is no whisper in the information furnished by the authorities with regard to the initiation of the disciplinary/pending disciplinary proceedings if any. As per above said G.O., in the event of any departmental or Judicial proceedings were pending before death of the Government employee/ pensioner and the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service only, the respondent authorities are at liberty to recover the amounts. In the instant case, there is no pendency of disciplinary proceedings against the husband of the petitioner till his death.

6. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents not even initiated the disciplinary proceedings during the life time of the death of the husband of the petitioner and the question of applicability of G.O.Ms.No.85, Finance & Planning (FIN.WING-Pen-I) Department, dtd. 12/7/1999 does not arise. Moreover, at the time of Special Audit conducted by the authorities, no notice was issued to the petitioner or her family members. The respondents conducted enquiry behind back of the petitioner and her family members and passed impugned recovery orders. There is no clear finding with regard to misappropriation of the funds by the Special Audit Team. There is no clarity on the misappropriation of amounts of Rs.53,61,878.00. Now, the respondent No.2 without