K.Vivekananda, Vs Karri Venkata Reddy — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

K.Vivekananda, Vs Karri Venkata Reddy — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil revision petition allowed; impugned order dated 07.03.2024 in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 set aside; executing Court directed to fix a fresh date by issuing notice for the petitioner's appearance, and on his explaining the reasons for his absence on 20.02.2024 and the circumstances for non-compliance with the Garnishee order, to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; no costs; pending miscellaneous applications stand dismissed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the civil revision petition under Section 115 CPC challenging the order dated 07.03.2024 passed in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 — whereby the petitioner/Mandal Educational Officer was treated as judgment debtor and the District Educational Officer directed to attach his salary to the tune of Rs.5,01,046/- — deserved to be allowed and the impugned order set aside. +1 more

Court's answer

The executing Court passed order dated 07.03.2024 against the petitioner even though he had produced a medical certificate showing justifiable reason for his absence before the Court, having failed to consider that certificate dated 12.02.2024 and the DEO proceedings Rc.No.1031/A1/2024 dated 06.03.2024 sanctioning half pay leave from 13.02.2024 to 22.02.2024.

Ratio / Principle

Though the non-appearance of the petitioner before the Court on 20.02.2024 would amount to violation of the Court's order, the petitioner explained the justifiable reason which prevented him from appearing, supported by medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 and the District Educational Officer's proceedings sanctioning half pay leave.

Key takeaways

In view of the circumstances narrated, this Court considered it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2024.ratio¶¶52
Record-based observation: on receiving the Garnishee order dated 21.05.2016 the then MEO should have acted promptly and deducted the amount from salary but did not do so; six MEOs worked in Kajuluru Mandal before the petitioner assumed charge on 03.07.2023, and the judgment debtor was relieved on 31.07.2017 with last paid certificate issued without mentioning the salary attachment particulars as per the Garnishee order.obiter¶¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition No. 768 of 2024 under Section 115 CPC — Mandal Educational Officer, Kajuluru (garnishee/salary disbursing officer) v. order dated 07.03.2024 of the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015, whereby he was treated as Judgment Debtor and the District Educational Officer was directed to attach his salary to the tune of Rs.5,01,046/- (1/3rd of salary after the first Rs.1,000/-, till realisation of the warrant amount or 24 months, whichever earlier) towards the decree for Rs.4,61,700/- obtained by respondent No.1 against respondent No.2, a teacher, pursuant to a Garnishee order dated 21.05.2016 which earlier MEOs had acknowledged (01.06.2016) but never acted upon. The petitioner, in charge only since 03.07.2023, failed to appear on 20.02.2024 as noticed because he had met with an accident; he placed on record a medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 and DEO proceedings Rc.No.1031/A1/2024 dated 06.03.2024 sanctioning half pay leave (13.02.2024 to 22.02.2024), which the Executing Court did not consider before passing the order. Held: the non-appearance would amount to violation of the Court's order, but the petitioner had explained a justifiable reason; the impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted to the Executing Court to fix a fresh date, call upon the petitioner to appear and explain his absence and the circumstances of non-compliance with the Garnishee order, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No costs; pending miscellaneous applications dismissed.

APHC010169092024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3333]

THURSDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 768/2024

Between:

K.VIVEKANANDA,, S/O.SATYANARATYANA, AGED 62 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS MANDAL EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KAJULURU MANDAL, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT (MEO, KAJULURU IS TREATED AS JDR VIDE COURT ORDERS DT.07.03.2024)

...PETITIONER

AND

KARRI VENKATA REDDY, S/O.AMMIREDDY, AGED 41 YEARS. CULTIVATION AND BUSINESS, D.NO.7-48, ANAPARTHI, ANAPARTHI MANDAL, ANAPARTHI DMC

PULIDINDI MESHAK SAMUEL BABURAO, . S/O.SYAMSON, AGED 55 YEARS. TEACHER, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD SCHOOL, KATRAVULAPALLI, PEDDAPURAM MANDAL, PEDDAPURAM DMC

DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA DISTRICT KAKINADA

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to allow the revision and set aside

2

VS,J CRP_768_2024

the Proceedings/Order passed in E.A.No.l07 of 2022 in E.P.No.250/2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015, dated 07.03.2024, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram and consequently suspend the Proceedings of the and 4th respondents in Rc.No.l301Al/2024 Dt. 15.03.2024 and grant

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to suspend the orders dated: 07.03.2024 in E.A.No.107/2022 in E.P.No. 250/2015 in O.S.No. 397/2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District pending disposal of the C.R.P. and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to receive the order Dt.2105-2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge Court, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District which was acknowiedged by the then Mandal Education Officer on 01.06.2016 who is the garnishee as additional material papers and pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to permit the Petitioner to service notice on the 2nd Respondent herein by way of substituted service by publishing the notice in a daily newspaper having vide circulation and pass

3

VS,J CRP_768_2024

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.M BALANAGA SRINIVAS

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

The Court made the following:

4

VS,J CRP_768_2024

ORDER :

This civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner/Mandal Educational Officer, Kajuluru Mandal under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short “C.P.C.”), challenging the order dated 07.03.2024 passed in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 by the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, whereby, the Executing Court treated the Mandal Educational Officer (for short “MEO”), Kajuluru Mandal, petitioner herein, as Judgment Debtor and directed the District Educational Officer to attach the salary of the MEO, Kajuluru to a tune of Rs.5,01,046/- and remit the same to the credit of E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 by deducting salary of MEO, Kajuluru to the extent 1/3^rd salary after deducting first portion of Rs.1,000/- till realisation of warrant amount or for 24 months, whichever is earlier. 2) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner herein is Garnishee in suit O.S.No.397 of 2015. Respondent No.1/plaintiff/ decree holder filed the said suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from respondent No.2/defendant/ judgment debtor. After full-fledged trial, the suit was decreed on 07.09.2015 for an amount of Rs.4,61,700/-. Respondent No.1 decree holder filed E.P.No.250 of 2015 for execution of the decree. As respondent No.2/judgment debtor was working as a teacher in Mandal Praja Parishad School, and the then Mandal Educational Officer, who was the disbursing officer, was served with a garnishee order dated 21.05.2016 directing him to withhold 1/3^rd of the salary of respondent No.2 after deducting first portion of Rs.1,000/- till realisation of warrant amount or for 24 months, whichever is earlier. The then MEO acknowledged the order on 01.06.2016, till then the Garnishee has not taken any steps to deduct

5

VS,J CRP_768_2024

the salary of respondent No.2/ judgment debtor. Subsequently, the concerned MEO was also transferred from that place and the MEOs worked thereafter are not aware of the Garnishee order. On 11.10.2022, predecessor MEO of the petitioner herein has received a show cause notice from the Court and informed the Court on 27.10.2022 that respondent No.2/judgment debtor was already transferred from Kajuluru Mandal to Peddapuram Mandal and was relieved on 31.07.2017 and Last Pay Certificate was also issued to him. The executing Court issued show cause notice dated 19.01.2024 which was received by the petitioner herein on 29.01.2024 directing him to appear personally on 20.02.2024, but as the petitioner herein met with the accident, he has failed to appear before the Court. As the petitioner did not appear before the Court, the executing Court passed the impugned order directing the District Educational Officer concerned to attach the salary of the present Mandal Educational Officer, who is the petitioner before this Court. The present revision has been filed to set aside the said order. 3) During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner herein has assumed charge as MEO on 03.07.2023 having been transferred from Konaseema District and that respondent No.1 Decree holder has not taken steps to get the decree executed even after the MEO filed reply on 27.10.2022 stating that respondent No.2/judgment debtor has been transferred to some other place. Further, the executing Court failed to consider the medical certificate issued by the doctor, and leave sanctioned by the District Educational Officer, Kakinada and the joining report of the petitioner herein explaining the reason for his absence on 20.02.2024, as such requested to set aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2024.

6

VS,J CRP_768_2024

Learned counsel for respondent No.1/decree holder supported the order passed by the executing Court in all aspects, and requested to dismiss the revision.

Admittedly, the suit O.S.No.397 of 2015 filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff/decree holder herein for recovery of money of Rs.3,00,000/- against respondent No.2/judgment debtor was decreed on 07.09.2015 for an amount of Rs.4,61,700/-. Thereafter, respondent No.1/decree holder filed E.P.No.250 of 2015 for execution of the decree, wherein Garnishee order was issued on 21.05.2016, and the same was acknowledged by the then MEO, Kajuluru Mandal on 01.06.2016.

Generally speaking, on receiving the Garnishee order, the then MEO should have acted promptly on the Garnishee order issued by the Court and deduct the amount from the salary, but he did not do so. However, respondent No.2/judgment debtor was transferred from Kajuluru Mandal and was relieved on 31.07.2017 and Last Paid Certificate was issued without recording about the Garnishee order. After six years i.e. on 11.10.2022 the then MEO received a show cause notice from the Court, and in turn, he informed the Court on 27.10.2022 that the judgment debtor was already transferred from Kajuluru Mandal to Peddapuram Mandal. Further, the Executing Court issued show cause notices in Dis.No.710 dated 17.12.2022 and Dis.No.422 dated 09.08.2023 stating that though respondent No.2/judgment debtor worked under the control of MEO till 31.07.2017, he failed to attach the amount and violated the Court orders and directed to appear him before the Court and submit proper explanation. Further, the executing Court issued show cause notice in Dis.No.74 dated 29.01.2024 directing the MEO to appear before the

7

VS,J CRP_768_2024

Court on 20.02.2024, but as the petitioner met with an accident and suffering from ill-health, he could not appear before the Court on that day. In support of his contention, he produced medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 issued by Poly Clinic and Hospital, Kakinada, and proceedings issued by District Educational Officer, Kakinada vide Rc.No.1031/A1/2024 dated 06.03.2024, which shows that the petitioner was granted medical leave (half pay leave) from 13.02.2024 to 22.02.2024.

However, the executing Court, without considering the medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 and proceedings of the District Educational Officer vide Rc.No.1031/A1/2024 dated 06.03.2024 sanctioning half pay leave to the petitioner from 13.02.2024 to 22.02.2024, passed the impugned order treating the MEO, Kajuluru (petitioner herein) as judgment debtor for his absence on 20.02.2024 and directed the District Educational Officer to attach the salary of the petitioner herein to a tune of Rs.5,01,046/- and remit the same to the credit of EP No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015.

No doubt, non appearance of the petitioner before the Court on 20.02.2024 would amount to violation of Court order. But, the petitioner explained the justifiable reason which prevented him from appearing before the Court by producing medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 and proceedings issued by the District Educational Officer, Kakinada vide Rc.No.1031/A1/2024. Further, immediately on receiving the Garnishee order dated 21.05.2016, the then MEO, Kajuluru Mandal should have acted promptly on the Garnishee order issued by the Court and deduct the amount from the salary, but he did not do so. Later, it appears from the record, 6 MEOs have worked in Kajuluru Mandal before the petitioner herein assumed charge on 03.07.2023. It

8

VS,J CRP_768_2024

is also evident from the record, respondent No.2/ judgment debtor was transferred from that place and relieved on 31.07.2017 and last paid certificate was also issued to him without mentioning the salary attachment particulars as per Garnishee order issued by the Court. However, the executing Court passed order dated 07.03.2024 against the petitioner herein even though he produced medical certificate showing justifiable reason for his absence before the Court. In view of the circumstances narrated above, this Court feels it appropriate to set aside the impugned order.

Accordingly, the civil revision petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2024 passed in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 by the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram. However, the executing Court is directed to fix a fresh date by issuing notice for appearance of the petitioner herein, on such date, he shall appear before the Executing Court and explain the reasons for his absence on 20.02.2024 and the circumstances for noncomplying with the Garnishee order, and on submissions made by the petitioner, the executing Court is directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall also stand dismissed. No costs.

________________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

11.09.2025 Ksp

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 07.03.2024 in E.A.No.107 of 2022 in E.P.No.250 of 2015 in O.S.No.397 of 2015 by which the Executing Court treated the Mandal Educational Officer, Kajuluru (petitioner herein) as Judgment Debtor and directed the District Educational Officer to attach his salary to the tune of Rs.5,01,046/- (1/3rd of salary after deducting the first Rs.1,000/- till realisation of warrant amount or 24 months, whichever is earlier) and remit it to the credit of E.P.No.250 of 2015.¶¶36
Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram · 07.03.2024
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.1/plaintiff/decree holder filed suit O.S.No.397 of 2015 for recovery of Rs.3,00,000/- from respondent No.2/defendant/judgment debtor.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
After full-fledged trial, the suit was decreed on 07.09.2015 for Rs.4,61,700/-.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.1/decree holder filed E.P.No.250 of 2015 for execution of the decree.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
A garnishee order dated 21.05.2016 was served on the then Mandal Educational Officer (disbursing officer) of respondent No.2/judgment debtor, directing withholding of 1/3rd of the judgment debtor's salary after the first Rs.1,000/- till realisation of warrant amount or 24 months, whichever is earlier.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
The then MEO acknowledged the garnishee order on 01.06.2016 but took no steps to deduct the salary; subsequent MEOs were not aware of the order.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.2/judgment debtor was transferred from Kajuluru Mandal to Peddapuram Mandal, relieved on 31.07.2017, and a Last Pay Certificate was issued to him.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
On 11.10.2022 the predecessor MEO received a show cause notice from the Court and replied on 27.10.2022 that the judgment debtor had already been transferred from Kajuluru to Peddapuram Mandal.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
The petitioner assumed charge as MEO, Kajuluru on 03.07.2023 on transfer from Konaseema District.¶¶39
Prior proceeding
Executing Court issued show cause notices in Dis.No.710 dated 17.12.2022 and Dis.No.422 dated 09.08.2023 stating that though the judgment debtor worked under the control of MEO till 31.07.2017 the MEO failed to attach the amount and violated the Court orders, and directing him to appear and submit proper explanation.¶¶44
Prior proceeding
Show cause notice dated 19.01.2024 (referred to elsewhere as Dis.No.74 dated 29.01.2024) received by the petitioner on 29.01.2024 directing personal appearance on 20.02.2024; the petitioner, having met with an accident, could not appear.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
In support of his contention regarding his absence on 20.02.2024, the petitioner produced medical certificate dated 12.02.2024 (Poly Clinic and Hospital, Kakinada) and DEO proceedings Rc.No.1031/A1/2024 dated 06.03.2024 sanctioning half pay leave from 13.02.2024 to 22.02.2024.¶¶47