Petitioner challenged deferment of increment punishment. Court declined to examine merits as the mercy petition before the Executive Director remained pending, and directed its disposal within eight weeks.
Directed the 1st respondent to dispose of the mercy petition dated 6.1.2006 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
W.P.No.32631 of 2015
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect vide proceedings dated 29.05.2002 as arbitrary and illegal.
The petitioner was appointed as Conductor in the respondent-Corporation in 1987. According to him, he was hospitalized from 29.05.2001 to 4.6.2001 and he sent intimation to the respondent-Corporation along with the medical certificate issued by the Government Hospital, Miryalguda. In spite of the same, the respondent-Corporation issued charge sheet on 5.6.2001, for which he submitted detailed explanation denying the charges levelled against him. Thereafter, during the enquiry he was found guilty of the charges vide proceedings dated 12.06.2001 and after issuing show cause notice dated 14.09.2001, he was removed from service vide proceedings dated 21.11.2001. Aggrieved by the termination order passed by the 4th respondent, he preferred an appeal to the appellate authority. The appellate authority vide order dated 29.05.2002, while setting aside the termination order passed by the 4th respondent, reinstated the petitioner into service by modifying the punishment to that of deferment of annual increments for a period of one year with cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed review before the 2nd respondent, who, in turn, rejected the same vide proceedings dated 7.10.2005.
Thereafter, he filed mercy petition before the 1st respondentExecutive Director on 6.1.2006. But, so far, no action has been taken thereon.
Since the mercy petition submitted by the petitioner is pending before the 1st respondent on 6.1.2006, I am not inclined to go into the merits of the case.
In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the mercy petition dated 6.1.2006 and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
7th October, 2015 rkk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to permit examination of merits of the writ petition regarding deferment of annual increment punishment when the mercy petition is still pending.
Petitioner
Respondent No.1/Executive Director
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
Respondent No.4
R. KANTHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
