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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 44829

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J
N.Shankar Naik – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/28131/2021



THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.28131 of 2021

ORDER:

Petitioner was appointed as Village Development Officer (Grade-II)

backlog vacancies, and in 2003 he was promoted as Panchayat Secretary (Grade-I). When he was serving as Panchayat Secretary of Maktal, a charge memo was issued to him alleging that he acted contrary to the Job Chart issued by Government in Proceedings No.199 dated 19.05.2000 and that he kept the Grampanchayat records of Jadcherla (given as additional charge to petitioner) in the control of K. Mahender, Junior Assistant thereby the petitioner is responsible for misappropriation of Rs.22,04,129/-, and further while handing over the charge to H. Surender, Panchayat Secretary, the petitioner did not handover the records to H.

Surender.

2. With respect to the first charge, the petitioner submitted explanation stating that only administrative records (other than financial matters) were maintained by K. Mahender, Junior Assistant, and whenever necessary, the records were given to K. Mahender and the petitioner used to take the records back, and that K. Mahender was a permanent Junior Assistant of Grampanchayat and earlier he was doing the job of collection of taxes and fees and he handedover the same job to him as there is no Bill Collector Post in Jedcherla Grampanchayat, and instructed K. Mahender to deposit the collected taxes and fees regularly in the Treasury. It is his case that recently he came to know that K. Mahender kept an amount of Rs.22,04,129/- with himself and never deposited the amount. Petitioner never received any letter either from State Audit or Local fund, Mahabubnagar or Accountant General.

3. With respect to second charge, petitioner stated that when he worked as Panchayat Secretary, Jedcherla Gram Panchayat, the records were kept with him only and he never kept the record with K. Mahender, Junior Assistant, and when the petitioner wanted to handover the charge to H. Surender, Panchayat Secretary, H. Surender asked the petitioner to keep the records with K. Mahender, Junior Assistant. Petitioner submitted that he handed over the charge to H. Surender on 06.06.2016 in the presence of Sri Chalapathaiah, Extention Officer (PR & RD) Jedcherla. H. Surender Panchayat Secretary also signed the charge stating that the records handed over were in the custody of K. Mahender, Junior Assistant.

4. Petitioner further states that K. Mahender, Junior Assistant, without handing over the record to H. Surender and without any authority collected the taxes from the public and used the said amount for his personal purposes without depositing the same in the concerned Sub-Treasury. Petitioner came to know that one S. Anjaneyulu, and P. Narsimhulu who are working as Kamatis have misappropriated the huge amounts of Grampanchayat, without even recording the amount collected in the records and without depositing the amounts in the treasury. Petitioner on coming to know that K. Mahender has committed misappropriation of funds, he gave a complaint to the District Panchayat Officer, Mahabubnagar and on his complaints, an enquiry was conducted against K. Mahender and two others.

5. Petitioner further states that the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Mahabubnagar issued notice to the petitioner asking the petitioner to attend enquiry at Kaverammapeta Grampanchayat on 07.11.2019, and the petitioner attended the enquiry, and the petitioner submitted his reply to the charges. Petitioner submits that the Enquiry Officer conducted enquiry contrary to the procedure contemplated under CCA Rules and submitted Report stating that the charges against the petitioner held proved merely basing on assumptions and presumptions. It is further stated that no Presenting Officer was appointed in the matter, and based on the Enquiry Officer report on 04.12.2019 to the Commissioner, a notice was issued to the petitioner asking for his explanation. Petitioner submitted his explanation on 14.02.2020, again another Memo was issue

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top