THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.35142 OF 2022

O R D E R

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 in his proceedings File No.CTE-EST-1/SMAO/24/2019/ESTABLISHMENT- 1 CTE dt.26.08.2020 awarding penalty of reduction of pay by 3 increments with cumulative effect and also treating the unauthorized absence from 01.06.2019 to 26.06.2019 as dies-non with break in service, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to release all monetary benefits that otherwise accrue to the petitioner with attendant benefits and to pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the petitioner was working as Administrative Officer at S.S. Government Polytechnic, Zaheerabad, Sanga Reddy District. On the basis of the complaint given by respondent No.4, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the order of respondent No.2 dt.19.07.2019.

The petitioner was admittedly absent from duties from 01.06.2019 to 26.06.2019 and on receipt a message on WhatsApp from respondent No.4 directing the petitioner to join duty immediately, the petitioner appeared and applied for leave from 01.06.2019 to 26.06.2019, however, the same was not considered and a Charge Memo dt.19.07.2019 was issued, to which, the petitioner submitted his statement of defence on 23.07.2019 explaining the compelling reasons for his absence. The petitioner had explained that his aunt, i.e., his father’s younger brother’s wife, who has reared him during his childhood, passed away and he was engaged in fulfilling the rituals. However, his explanation was not considered. He also submitted that the suspension beyond six months is required to be reviewed under FR 53 of the A.P. Fundamental Rules which was not done in his case, but subsequently, an enquiry was conducted on 25.02.2020 by issuing a questionnaire and the enquiry officer had given findings on the basis of the replies furnished by the petitioner to the questionnaire. The enquiry report was supplied to the petitioner and challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.5961 of 2017. It is submitted that by order dt.08.03.2017, the enquiry report was held to be not sustainable in law. Thereafter, the enquiry was again conducted and the impugned order dt.26.08.2020 was passed imposing the penalty of reduction of pay by three increments with cumulative effect and also by treating the period of unauthorized absence, i.e., 26 days as dies-non with break in service.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the punishment imposed by respondent No.2 is nothing but double jeopardy because it not only imposed the punishment of withholding of 3 increments with cumulative effect but also treated the period of 26 days of alleged unauthorized absence as dies-non with break in service, which has severe adverse effect on his pensionary benefits. It is thus submitted that the above punishments imposed on the petitioner are disproportionate to the charge of unauthorized absence of 26 days and the authority has failed to consider the reasons given by the petitioner for the alleged unauthorized absence.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that though there is an appeal provision against the order of punishment, the petitioner could not file it within time due to his ill-health and other domestic problems and that there is no provision in the Service Rules to condone the delay in filing the appeal under the Telangana Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (for short, ‘the CCA Rules, 1991’) and therefore, the present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the punishment order.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the above submissions has placed rel