Disposed

K. Gunasagar v. The Disciplinary Authority-cum-Asst. General Manager

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Mar 2023WP/597/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Smt Justice V. Sujatha disposed of a writ petition filed by a bank officer challenging a departmental enquiry based on alleged bias. The court directed the disciplinary authority to decide the pending appeal within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direct the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's pending appeal within two months from receipt of this order.

K. Gunasagar Vs The Disciplinary… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

Writ Petition No. 597 of 2015

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226

¶5

of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶6

“....to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in conducting departmental enquiry pursuant to the charge memo No.ZO:CTR:OF:KG:31176:KUPPAM:2014-15, dated.23.05.2014 issued by the 1^st respondent herein as vitiated by principles of bias as the disciplinary authority and the enquiry officer are rank subordinates to the complainant/witnesses as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to set-aside the same.....”

¶7

The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as Probationary Officer (Direct Recruitment) on 06.03.1995 and thereafter, on 05.04.2014, he was suspended by the 3^rd respondent herein alleging that he has made certain unauthorized debits in different accounts of the staff to a tune of around Rs.2.23 Crores and credited to the petitioner’s State Bank accounts.

¶8

Thereafter, the petitioner was arrested and released on bail on 24.07.2014 and the respondents have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner by issuing a charge memo on 23.05.2014. For which, the petitioner has submitted his

¶9

¶10

explanation on 21.08.2014, and thereafter, on concluding the enquiry, the enquiry officer has communicated the enquiry report on 30.09.2015 imposing major penalty of dismissal from service from 09.11.2015.

¶11

At that stage, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the action in conducting the departmental enquiry pursuant to the charge Memo. No.ZO:CTR:OF:KG:31176:KUPPAM: 2014-15, dated.23.05.2014 on the ground that it is vitiated by principles of bias, as the disciplinary authority and the enquiry officer are rank subordinates to the witnesses.

¶12

The respondent No.1 has filed a counter supporting his case stating that the disciplinary action has been initiated against the petitioner in accordance with the rules and regulations in force as he was found guilty of misappropriation of a sum of Rs.2.25 Crores.

¶13

The petitioner vide I.A.No.1 of 2023 requesting to amend the prayer to quash the disciplinary enquiry report which was issued by the 2^nd respondent on 31.07.2015. It appears that the punishment against the petitioner was imposed in pursuance of the enquiry report dated 31.07.2015 and challenging the same,

¶14

¶15

the petitioner has preferred an appeal on 09.11.2015 which is pending for consideration before the 1^st respondent.

¶16

In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the 1^st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 09.11.2015 in accordance with the Rules in force within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶17

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be

¶18

no order as to costs.

¶19

As a sequel, miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶20

SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

17.03.2023 psr/kbs

208

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶25

(Disposed of)

¶26

Writ Petition No.597 of 2015

¶27

Date: 17.03.2023

¶28

Psr/kbs

K. Gunasagar v. The Disciplinary Authority-cum-Asst. General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Gunasagar v. The Disciplinary Authority-cum-Asst. General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Tirumaleshwar Reddy S/o Bhaskar Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G.Ramanjaneyulu, Vs The State of a.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary

R.Narasimha Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Nagothi Siva Kumari, Vs The Asst. General Manager

Chintham /Chintala Satish Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Y. Srinivasulu, Vs The Managing Director