Dismissed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, v. v. Ranga Reddy, S/o Koti Reddy, Sub-

Telangana HC28 Jan 2013WP/1568/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court dismissed the Government of Andhra Pradesh's writ petition challenging the Administrative Tribunal's order promoting a respondent to District Registrar pending disciplinary proceedings, leaving the matter with the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed at admission stage; one month granted to comply with Tribunal orders; appearance before Tribunal stayed.

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vs v. Ranga… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.1568 of 2013

¶3

ORDER : (per AM,J.)

¶4

The Government of Andhra Pradesh has filed the present writ petition impugning the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in V.M.A No.1732 of 2011 in O.A No.663 of 2011, dated 03.12.2012, vide which the petitioners herein were directed to comply with the interim order dated 10.02.2011, failing which they shall make their personal appearance before the Tribunal and as to why the orders could not be implemented.

¶5

2. By virtue of order dated 21.01.2013, the present petitioners were directed to consider the case of the respondent for promotion to the post of District Registrar without taking into consideration the charges leveled against him.

¶6

3. An enquiry was conducted against the respondent i.e., V.Ranga Reddy on various charges. The Enquiry Officer vide his report dated 30.10.2009 recorded a finding that the charges framed against the respondent are not proved.

¶7

4. It is seen that the first charge relates to re-scanning of 45 documents by the respondent while discharging his duties as SubRegistrar Grade-1, in Sub-registrar office, Gundala misrepresenting the details without obtaining prior permission from the District Registrar concerned. It is seen that disciplinary authority has not passed any orders disagreeing the findings of the Enquiry Officer. Ultimately the Government issued a memo dated 10.01.2012, which shows that the matter was referred to the A.P. Vigilance Commission and on its recommendation the matter was directed to refer to the Cyber Crimes

¶8

Department to prove the charges levelled against the respondent. It is clear that there is a delay of two years in taking action on the enquiry officer’s report.

¶9

5. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that as there is already an interim order granted by the Tribunal, we do not want to exercise our jurisdiction and leave the matter to be decided by the Tribunal.

¶10

6. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. However, the petitioners are granted one more month to comply the orders of the Tribunal and the appearance of the petitioners before the Tribunal shall be stayed till then. Any promotion given to the respondent shall be subject to out come of the O.A. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the O.A. as expeditiously as possible.

¶11

ASHUTHOSH MOHUNTA, J

¶12

----------------------N.RAVI SHANKAR, J

¶13

Date: 28-01-2013 Note Issue CC in two days (bo)

¶14

Knl/Murthy

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, v. v. Ranga Reddy, S/o Koti Reddy, Sub-

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, v. v. Ranga Reddy, S/o Koti Reddy, Sub-

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by Secretary, Vs Syed Masood Police Constable No. 941

T. Srinivasa Rao Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its

The Director General, Vs Chinnaiah Vuba

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vs K.Krishna Rao

Khaja Begum D/o Mahaboob Hussain, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its

The Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs T.Prasad (since died)