HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION (TR) No. 3993 OF 2017

O R D E R:

Petitioner’s case is that while he was working as Joint Sub-Registrar, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned Charge Memo dated 12-03-2015, framing a charge that he registered prohibited property (Govt. Land) out of Survey No.627 of Husnabad Revenue Village of Karimnagar District through “anywhere” method and facilitated the parties to alienate Government Land in violation of Section 22-A (1) of the Registration Act, 1908 through Registered Document Nos. 438/2014, 439/2014 and 2545/2014 of Sub-Registrar Office, Mallial which amounts to lack of integrity, devotion to duty and conduct unbecoming of a Government servant, thereby contravened sub-rules (1), (2) and (4) of Rule 3 of AP Civil Services (Conduct) Rules 1964. Petitioner is stated to have submitted detailed explanation on 27-03-2015, denying the charge and requested to drop the charge. However, it is stated, Enquiry Officer seems to have been appointed who has been proceeding with enquiry.

1.1 According to Para 3(1) of the A.P. Public Employment (Organization of Local Cadres and the Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (Presidential Order), the State Government within 12 months from the commencement of the Order organize classes of posts in the Civil Services and classes of Civil posts under the State into different local cadres for different parts of the State to the extent and in the manner specified therein. As per the instructions given in G.O.Ms.No.728, dated 01-11-1975, the scheme for organization of local cadres in the Registration and Stamps Department has been formulated in consultation with the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Hyderabad; accordingly, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.732, dated 02-07-1976, whereunder the scheme of organization of local cadres in Registration and Stamps Department has been approved, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S. Prakasha Rao v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes1 whereunder it is held that “once the State Government had organized the class or classes of posts in the civil services of and class or classes of civil posts under, the State as local cadres, it ceases to have any power to bifurcate or reorganize a zone within a zone, cadre or cadres therein. In exercise of the power under the proviso to para 3 (1), it is for the President alone notwithstanding the expiry of the period of twelvemonths prescribed in para 3(1), by an order require the State

1990 (4) SLR, 215

Government whenever he considers it expedient so to do to have the power under para 3(1) exercised. Therefore, the State Government shall have to place necessary material before the President who shall consider that it is expedient to organize any class or classes of posts in the civil services of and class or classes of civil posts under, the State into a further local cadre within the local cadre in the zone already prescribed and to pass an order in that regard requiring the State Government to so organize it. It is made clear for the purpose of efficient administration or convenience, the State Government may create division/divisions within the local area or local cadre. But for the purpose of recruitment, seniority, promotion, discharge, etc. the local cadre once organised under para 3 (1) shall be final and continue to be operative until action is taken under the proviso to para 3(1) of the Order”. Accordingly the 4^th respondent is the nodal authority, who has got competency to take any action but not the 3 respondent who being a non-nodal authority as is clear from the proceedings of the 2th respondent bearing Memo No. E2/7293/2008, dt. 20-05-2009. Even with regard to transfers also the same shall be done by the nodal DIGs, as is clear from the Memo No.A1/1035/2013, dt 5-08- 2013 of the 4^th respondent. Therefore the impugned Charite Memo issued by the and respondent is totally illegal, arbitrary and void abi nitio being withou