The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the Government challenging the Tribunal's order quashing a removal order and directing reinstatement, holding the writ devoid of merits.
Writ Petition dismissed. Respondents permitted to initiate disciplinary action in accordance with Rules 20 and 21.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.23303 OF 2003
ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)
This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order, dated 24.1.2003, in O.A.No.526 of 2003 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”) and quash the same.
2. The petitioners herein are respondents, and the respondent herein is the applicant, in the Original Application. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter, referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. The applicant was initially appointed as Civil Assistant Surgeon in the year 1976-77. The applicant acquired his M.D., in Anesthesiology and was later, posted as Assistant Professor in Anesthesiology in Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad. The services of the applicant have been regularized and probation was also declared. While so, the applicant sought for and was granted leave from June 1989 to 31.12.1990 on domestic grounds. He extended the leave from time to time. The respondents did not issue any orders either granting or rejecting his extension of leave. While so, the Government issued a show cause notice, dated 29.4.1993, for which, the applicant filed his reply on 30.7.1993 and sent it by registered post. The applicant appeared himself before the Enquiry Officer and filed Form No.I and written statement, and participated in the enquiry. He requested for issuance of posting orders, but in vain. So, he filed O.A.No.6743 of 1997 before the Tribunal. As a counter blast, the respondents issued G.O.Ms.No.262, dated 11.7.1997,
removing the applicant from service for his unauthorized absence. So, the applicant filed O.A.No.1121 of 1998. The Tribunal vide its judgment, dated 15.3.2002, set aside G.O.Ms.No.262, dated 11.7.1997, with liberty to take action as per law. Though the applicant made several representations to comply with the orders of the Tribunal and to issue posting orders, the respondents ignored the same. So, the applicant filed O.A.No.11130 of 2002 before the Tribunal and the same was disposed of on 30.12.2002 directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service forthwith and that order does not preclude the respondents from taking disciplinary action in accordance with Rules even after reinstatement. The applicant filed a caveat application in this Court. As a counter-blast, respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms.No.481, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (VC.II(2)) Department, dated 20.12.2002, confirming the punishment of removal from service as imposed in G.O.Ms.No.262, dated 11.7.1997. Hence, he filed the aforementioned Original Application.
4. The Tribunal, upon considering the material on record, disposed of the Original Application by quashing G.O.Ms.No.481, dated 20.12.2002, and directed the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service forthwith, as directed by the Tribunal in its order, dated 30.12.2002, in O.A.No.11130 of 2002 and further, to pass appropriate orders basing on the explanation submitted by the applicant giving cogent/proper reasons as to how his explanation cannot be accepted. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed by the Government.
5. The Tribunal rightly set aside the termination order of the applicant holding that the respondents did not follow the procedure under relevant statutory Rules. The contentions raised in the reply of applicant have not been adverted to. The order under challenge before the Tribunal is total non-application of mind. That order needs
no interference by this Court because no illegal or incorrect finding has been given by the Tribunal. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, this order will not preclude the petitioners herein from initiating disciplinary action against the respondent herein strictly in accordance with Rules 20 and 21 of the Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
_______________ JUSTICE ANIS
Date: 05.03.2014 AMD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.23303 OF 2003
DATE: 05.03.2014
AMD
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition against the Tribunal's order quashing the removal order needs interference.
Whether the Tribunal committed any error in finding that the respondents failed to follow statutory rules.
Whether the challenged Tribunal order was vitiated by total non-application of mind.
Government
Civil Assistant Surgeon
K.C. Bhanu
Anis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
