Dismissed

B.G.N.R. Anjaneyulu v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC7 Mar 2012WP/6210/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the dismissal of an interim application by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, which refused suspension of a government order dismissing the petitioner from service following a criminal conviction. The High Court found no merit and dismissed the petition while directing priority disposal of the main petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

B.G.N.R. Anjaneyulu Vs The Government of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.6210 of 2012

¶3

DT.07-03-2012

¶4

Between: B.G.N.R.Anjaneyulu, s/o Kameswara Rao

¶5

… Petitioner

¶6

And The Govt. of Andhra poradesh, rep by the Secretary to Govt. (Revenue) Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad & ors.

¶7

… Respondents

¶8

Counsel for the Appellant: Sri T.Vijay Hanuman Singh

¶9

Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following Judgment:

¶10

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR

¶11

WRIT PETITION No.6210 of 2012

¶12

JUDGMENT: Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah)

¶13

The petitioner herein filed O.A.No.1548 of 2012, on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short the Tribunal) questioning the order of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.26 Revenue (Vig II) Department, dated

¶14

07-01-2012 in dismissing him from service on the ground that A.C.B case filed against him in C.C.No.17/2009 ended in conviction by Judgment dated 09-08-2011, on the file of the Special Judge for S.P.E & A.C.B cases, Vijayawada.

¶15

It is the case of the petitioner herein that the Tribunal by order dated 28-02-2012 held that the petitioner is not entitled for the interim relief of suspension of the said G.O.Ms.No.26, Revenue (Vig II) Department, dated 07-01-2012 dismissed him from service, and issued notice to the respondents returnable in four weeks in the meanwhile. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that against the petitioner departmental enquiry was conducted and in the departmental enquiry he was imposed punishment of penalty of Rs.5,000/- vide proceedings in Rc.No.11291/99 E2 dated 13-4-2000 of the Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur District/the 3^rd respondent herein and thereafter he was reinstated into service and therefore pursuant to the conviction by the Special Judge for

¶17

S.P.E & A.C.B cases, Vijayawada by Judgment dated 09-08-2011, he could not have been dismissed from the service.

¶18

Whether the earlier departmental proceedings will come in the way of the Government in dismissing the petitioner from service in view of conviction is the matter to be decided by the Tribunal in the main O.A. Therefore, we are of the opinion the Tribunal rightly dismissed the interim application filed by the petitioner seeking suspension of said Government order dismissing him from service.

¶19

We do not find any merit in the Writ Petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. However, the Tribunal to dispose of O.A on priority basis. No costs.

¶20

______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J

¶21

_______________ K.G.SHANKAR,J

¶22

Dt:7-03-2012 grk

¶23

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR

¶24

(The Judgment of the Bench delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah)

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.6210 of 2012

¶26

DT.07-03-2012

B.G.N.R. Anjaneyulu v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

B.G.N.R. Anjaneyulu v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary Vs Ch. Sankara Rao ( Hg 263 )

The National Thermal Power Corporation Limited Vs M. Sathish

The Commissioner, Vs N. Prasad

The Divisional Forest Officer, Vs Sri v. Baba Saheb

The Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Vs T. Surender

State of Andhra Pradesh, Vs M.Narasimha Rao