THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

WRIT PETITION (Tr) NO.1837 OF 2017

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“… to call for the records relating to the impugned Government Memo

No.35555/VIG.VI (1)/2004-11, Revenue Department, dated 20.2.2009 and quash or set aside the same by declaring it as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to the material on record and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution and consequently direct the respondents to drop the disciplinary case against the applicant and

further grant all consequential and attendant benefits...”

2) Heard Sri Poodattu Amarender, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Services-I

appearing for the respondents.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while the petitioner was working as Shroff in the Office of Sub Registrar Office, Wanaparthy, a surprise check was conducted by the ACB officials in the said office on 12.03.2004 wherein an excess amount of Rs.88/- was found in possession of the petitioner other than the personal amount declared in the personal cash register during the surprise check. Subsequently, respondent No.1 has issued Proc.No.E/517/2004, dated 06.01.2005, placing the petitioner

under suspension and thereafter a charge memo dated 17.02.2005 was also issued to the petitioner framing two charges against her, to which, she submitted a detailed representation denying the charges. However, without considering the said explanation, a common enquiry was conducted into the allegations levelled against the petitioner and other staff members including the Sub- Registrar and a report dated 07.02.2007 was submitted holding that the charge against the petitioner was not proved. Thereafter, the petitioner was reinstated to duty vide Proceedings dated 07.01.2008. While so, respondent No.1 has issued a show cause notice No.G/638/04-5, dated 17.07.2008 read with 25.07.2008, disagreeing with the report of the Enquiry Officer and proposing to inflict the punishment of stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect and directed the petitioner to submit her explanation thereon, to which, the petitioner has submitted her explanation and requested to drop the further action in the matter. However, vide proceedings No.G/638/2004, dated 19.04.2010, respondent No.2 has imposed the punishment of stoppage of one increment for six months without cumulative effect. Therefore, the impugned orders issued by the Government dated 20.02.2009 and the consequential order dated 19.04.2010 are illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without application of mind and contrary to the principles of natural justice.

3.1) Learned counsel has contended that the allegations are trivial in nature, the respondents have conducted a common enquiry and the enquiry report is also in favour of the petitioner and there is no evidence against the petitioner on record to impose the punishment and moreover no reasons are assigned for disagreement with the enquiry report. As the enquiry officer has categorically stated that the petitioner was not given any opportunity by the ACB officials and the charge against the petitioner is not proved, there is no basis for the disciplinary authority to disagree with the findings of the enquiry officer and impose punishment upon her, which is illegal and arbitrary. Learned counsel has further contended that based on the very same ACB raid, allegations were levelled against 6 persons and a common enquiry was conducted in respect of all the officers including the petitioner herein. The said enquiry report was accepted in favour of some of the delinquents and they were exonerated from the charges even though the allegations against those delinquents are more serious in nature than that of the petitioner herein. Hence, the impugned order imposing the punishment against the petitioner leaving two others is absolutely discriminatory. Further, one Hanumaiah, the then Sub-Registrar, was imp