SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.531 of 2021

Advocates:
['BALAJI MEDAMALLI', 'GP', '', 'GP']

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-

“……..to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondent authorities particularly the 3rd respondent herein in issuing proceedings in Rc.No.282/2021-A2, dated 10.02.2020 placing the petitioner under suspension and continuing his suspension without revoking or serving charge memo, as highly arbitrary, illegal, null and void, without jurisdiction, contrary to CCA & Conduct Rules and consequently to set aside the same directing the 3rd respondent herein to reinstate the petitioner by revoking the suspension and to pass such other order.”

2. The petitioner was selected through A.P. Public Service Commission to the post of Typist in Revenue Department he was appointed and posted as Typist in the Revenue Department at Rajam, Srikakulam District on 15.11.1986. In the year 2002 he was promoted as Senior Assistant and posted in the office of the District Collector, Srikakulam, thereafter he was promoted to the post of Deputy Tahsildar in the year 2009 and continued in the office of the District Collector.

3. On 03.01.2015, the petitioner was deputed to APCRDA and posted as Personal Secretary to the Commissioner, APCRDA in the cadre of Deputy Tahsildar. The petitioner continued to work in the said office in the same cadre till 06.12.2019, on which date he was relieved from APCRDA on promotion and he was asked to report to the District Collector, Srikakulam.

4. Accordingly, the petitioner reported to duty before the District Collector, Srikakulam on 07.12.2019. The District Collector, Srikakulam, the 3rd respondent herein posted the petitioner as Special Tahsildar (land Reforms), Srikakulam on 10.12.2019 and further appointed him as Liaison Officer to the District Administration and various Heads of the Departments in A.P. Secretariat i.e., the office of the 2nd respondent herein.

5. Since 11.12.2019 onwards the petitioner has been attending to duties as entrusted by the District Administration of Srikakulam as well as the Heads of the Departments of various departments pursuing liaison with the A.P. Secretariat and other Heads of the Departments at State level. The tour diary maintained by the petitioner from 11.12.2019 to 10.02.2020 is also filed along with this writ petition for perusal of this Court. The petitioner has been working in the department for the past 34 years, worked in various cadres and during his entire career he never received any memos or any complaints from whomsoever concerned either in regard to his service or his behaviour with the superiors as well as the staff.

6. Apart from that the petitioner has received so many awards/certificates for the services rendered by him in the department, but to his shock and surprise, the petitioner received suspension order from 3rd respondent dated 10.02.2020 placing him under suspension citing a reason that the “individual is not coordinating properly for the submission of para wise remarks for the Court cases and also not properly coordinated for the submission of written instructions to the Government Pleaders which has led to issuance of stay orders badly affecting the Government’s interest. Due to utter failure and dereliction of duties of the employee, it hampered the administration and gravely affected the government interest”

and contemplated to initiate disciplinary proceedings.

7. In this regard, the petitioner has also submitted detailed representations on 09.07.2020 and 11.11.2020. In spite of his repeated representations and personal requests the 3rd respondent has not revoked the suspension, not reinstated the petitioner into service nor initiated the disciplinary proceedings by issuing necessary charge memo and he was kept under suspension without any substantial proceedings.

8. The petitioner further contended that as per A.P. Civil Service (CCA) Rules, 1991 and the circulars and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top