Page 1

JUDGMENT

NON- REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2768-2769 OF 2013

[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) Nos.719-720 OF 2011]

Mohd. Yousuf

… Appellant

Versus

Director General of Fire Services, A. P. & Ors.

… Respondents

J U D G M E N T

Aftab Alam, J.

1.

Delay condoned.

2.

Leave granted.

3.

One of these two appeals is directed against the main judgment and

order, dated March 23, 2005 passed by a division bench of the Andhra

Pradesh High Court in writ petition No.3478 of 2004. By this judgment, the

High Court, allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents, set aside the

order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and restored and

confirmed the order of the appellant’s dismissal from service. Against the

1

Page 2

JUDGMENT

judgment passed in the writ petition, the appellant filed a review petition

(Miscellaneous Petition No.12798 of 2005) which was dismissed by order

dated April 13, 2010. The other appeal is filed against the order dismissing

the review petition.

4.

The appellant was working as a driver at Fire Station Sanathnagar

under the Fire Service Department. He was dismissed from service

following an ex-parte enquiry on charges of unauthorized absence. The

order of dismissal was passed on January 12, 1994 but dismissal from

service was made retrospective, with effect from December 29, 1992.

5.

The case of the appellant was that on account of ill health and family

issues, he had submitted an application for voluntary retirement from service

with effect from December 1, 1992 under rule 43(1) of the Andhra Pradesh

Revised Pension Rules, 1980. His application was neither accepted nor

rejected, but on November 19, 1992, he was informed that a charge memo

bearing No. 15/PR/89 was pending against him and, therefore, his request

for voluntary retirement would be considered only after its disposal. On

November 25, 1992, the appellant represented before the departmental

authority that the charge memo was disposed of in the year 1990 itself and

requested that action be taken on his application for voluntary retirement.

On November 26, 1992, the appellant was advised by the Divisional Fire

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

Officer to perform his duties till further orders were received from the

Regional Fire Officer. The matter stood at that stage when the appellant,

while on duty on December 29, 1992 became ill and was admitted to the

hospital where he was advised by the doctors complete bed rest for at least

two months. While the appellant was unwell and was undergoing treatment,

a charge memo, being Rc. 4/PR/A2/93 was issued against him on July 5,

1993. An ex-parte enquiry was held and the enquiry report was submitted to

the Director General of Fire Services on November 27, 1993 and finally by

order dated January 12, 1994, the appellant was dismissed from service

without being given a copy of the enquiry report or any opportunity to show

cause against the proposed punishment.

6.

The appellant took recourse to departmental appeals. His appeals to

the departmental officers were unsuccessful, but at the end of the hierarchy,

the Home Minister passed the order on March 22, 1999 directing that the

appellant’s dismissal would be effective from the date of the order i.e.

January 12, 1994 and not from the earlier date, December 29, 1992.

7.

His dismissal order was revised accordingly.

8.

Failing to get the desired relief from the departmental authorities, the

appellant finally moved the Administrative Tribunal by O.A. No.4949/2000.

The Tribunal by its order, dated March 11, 2003 found and held that the

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the A.P.C.S. (CC & A) Rules

1991, and no enquiry report was furnished to the appellant. Further that on

receipt of the Enquiry Officer’s report, the Regional Fire Officer

straightaway issued the order of punishment dismissing the applicant from

s