Disposed

T.Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Oct 2024WP/12158/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the petitioner's suspension and sought its revocation. The court observed that disciplinary proceedings were pending and the petitioner was working as Assistant Commissioner. It directed the respondents to complete the proceedings within six months, acknowledging the petitioner's age and retirement proximity.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within six months from the date of receipt of the order.

T.Venkatesh Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁸⁴ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 12158 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

T.Venkatesh, S/o. T.Chandraiah, Age 59 Years, Working as Deputy Commissioner And Executive Officer, Sri Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Kondagattu, Jagitial District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Dr. B R.Ambedkar Telangana State Secretariat, Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner and Director, Endowments Department, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that a)Proceedings in Rc.No.Vl/405412024-1 dated 23.03.2024 whereby petitioner was kept under suspension by 2nd respondent^is illegal and arbitrary by Article 14 as 16 of Constitution of lndia. b)Further^declare that petitioner is entitled to be continued in service by revoking the^suspension i ssued Proceed ings in Rc. No. Vl/4054 I 2024- 1 dated 23.03.2024.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶16

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances^statedin the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleasedto direct the 2nd respondent to continue the service by suspending the operation^of

¶17

the impugned ord:r of the proceedings in Rc.No.Vr/4054 12024-1 dated 23.O3.2024 pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶18

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶19

Between:

¶20

1 Ttre State of T,Iangana, Rep by its principal Secretary, Revenue (hndowments) Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Terangdna state secretariat, Telangana, Hy^jerabad.

¶21

The commissioner and Director, Endowments Department, Terangana State, Hyderabad.

¶22

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶23

AND

¶24

T.venkatesh, s/o. T (:handraiah, Aqe s9 years, working as Deputy commissioner And Executive Officer Sri Anjaneyabwamy Tempie,-Ko"E"srtt,rG6ttiri'tj;;iri;i

¶25

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶26

Petition under .iection 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in r;upport of the petition, the High court may be preased to vacate the interim orders granted on o3-0s-2024 in lA.No.1/2024 in Wp.No.12158 12O24 and dismiss the W.P. as it is devoid of merits.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt SRtNIVASA RAO MADIRAJU

¶28

Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES ll

¶29

The Court made the f,:llowing: ORDER

¶30

---7

¶31

THE HON'BLE^{SHRI JUSTICEANILKUMAR JUKANTI}

¶32

WRIT PETITION^{No.12158 of2024}

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

This ri rit pct ition^{is filcd scekingt.l-rc follon'ing pra]'er}

¶35

"to issue a tt'rit^{order or directionespeciall5'onein} the nature of^{r'vrit of mandamusde claring that}

¶36

a Proceedings in^{Rc.No.VI/4O54120241dated} 23.O3.2022^{u'herebypctitioner rT'as kept undcr} suspension b1'^{2"'t respondenLisillcgal and^} arbitrary by Article^{l4 &I6 of ConstituLion of} lndia.

¶37

b FurLher cleclare that^{petitioneris cntitled to be} continLled in^{scrvicc by revokingthe} suspcnsion^issucd Procccdingsⁱⁿ Itc.No.vll'1Oo'lI?O2'+-|^{daLcd 23 03 2o2tl}

¶38

C :rncl tc; pass sttch^{olhcr ordcr or ordcrs as Lhrs} I-{on'ble Courl.^{m.{ciccm lit and propt--rin thc} circumslance^{s ol thc casc."}

¶39

He ard Mr. Srinivasa^{Rao Madiraju, learnedcounsel lor} petitioner, and S.^{Satyanara,yanaRao, learneciGovernment} Pleader for^{Services-l for respondents'}

¶40

Brief facts:

¶41

Petitioner^{joinecl as .JuniorAssistant intl-re Office of} Andhra Pradesh^{Public Service Commission (for short 'APPSCJ} AS on 16.05.1996.^{He joined in Endor'r'mentsl)epartment} Assistant Commissioner^{on29 09'2O11 under direct} recruitment r,ide^{APPSC Notification2007. Petitioner\:aS}

¶42

.J \K. .J \ I' \o i.2 i 18 o: 202-1

¶43

promoted as Jeputv Commisston er on 29.lO.2O1g. He u,as transferred to An jane-r a Su aml Templc, Konclagattll, Jagitial District on O I 07.2021. On the basis of neu,s paper article, a preliminan' enquirr \'as conducted b1. the Additional Commissioner. Dltdou'menLs Department. In the report, Additional conrmissr.ner requested to take disciplinary action on petitioner. I3asing on the prcliminarv enquiry.report dated 21 .O3.2024. pr:titioner u as kept under suspcnsion and (9) charges u'ere lramed. petitioner submitted a u ritten statement dated 18.04.2024 as a defense along with certain material.

¶44

By an orcler clated 23.O3.2O2q, the Commissioner/ Director of Endou.ments Department exercising pou,ers under Telangana Civ I Serr.ices (CCA) Rules, 199 i placed the petitioner undcr susltcr-rsron. petitioner is being paid subsistence a1l<,r.l,ance equivalent to the leave salary on half pay leave. In th s rr-rit petition, petitioner challenges the order dated 23-03.2O'.>.4 and seeks rejection of suspension issued vide proceedings datecl 23.O3.2024.

¶45

5 Learned o()unsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner has put in 28 v:ars of unblemished service and it is onlv on

-..=-=-reffiX-rrl

' ;a-::

W. t'. No. i 2 I 5a ol 2O2'+

¶50

the basis of ne'nvs^{paper article, anenquiry has been} conducted. It is lurther submitted^{that basing on the enquiry} report on the ground that^{petitioner has been negligentin the} administration^{of temple, he r'vas placedundersuspension'}

¶51

It is submitted that^{pclitioncrhassubmiLtedhis} explanation or-r^{18.04.2024i.e ., *'ritten slatement of defense to} the charges framed^{and communicatedto him' It is further} submitted rhat^{pcritiortcris placed under suspension from} 23.03.2024 and thal^{there is no further progressinthe} enquiry and it is^{prayedthat enquiry/disciplinaryproceedings} be completed at an earll'clate,^{as petitioneris approaching his} superannuation. It^{rsalso submitted thatpetitionerhas} rendered 28 vears of^{servicer'r'ithout any blemish' Hence,a} direction be issued to^{complete the disciplinary proceedings at} an early' date.

¶52

7 . Learned coun sel for^{respondentssubmitted that} Additional Commissioner,^{Endort'mentsDepartment,having} conducted a^{preliminary enquirv,was of the opinionthat} disciplinarl' action^{be initiated,as petitioner r'r'as negligent in} administration^{of templeand lhat on the basis of a news paper}

¶53

JJ\K. J \ I']. \o. I 2 L 58 oI 2024

¶54

article, prelirninan' enquin \'as conductecl, resulting in framing of (9) <:harges u,hich are serious in nature and hence, petitioner r,r'as 'ig}'r Ll,r placed trncicr sr-rspcnsion bl proceedings dated 23.03 .2C2.4. lL rs lurthcr submittcd tlrat petitroner has submitted his ri.ritten statement of defense b1, u.a1, of letter dated 1a.O4.ilo24 to thc Commissioni:r. Endos,ments Department. tt is lastlr- surbrnitted that disciplinary proceedings u,ould be conducted in accordance lrrith law and it is premature tc lilc a u rit petition and hence. rvrit petition be dism is sed .

¶55

B. Heard learned counscls, perused the record ar-rd considered the^-ival submissions

¶56

Petitioner joincd sen,ice in Endo',vments Department as Assistant Comrnissioner in 20 I 1 , uras promoted as Deputy Commissioner in the year 2OlB and u-as transferred as Deputy Commissioner irt Sri Anjaner,a Su'am_r' temple. Kondagattu in July, 2O2I. Additional Commissioner, Endowments Department in Itis prelimirran'enqr.rir,r' rtas of the opinion that disciplinary act on be initiated againsr the petitioner. On the basis of the pre liminary enquin' report dated 21.O3.2024, (91

¶57

/."

¶58

.JAK, J W.P.No.l215a^{oI 2024}

¶59

¶60

¶61

charges^{\'erc framed against petilioner and petitloner\ias} askedtosubmithrsexplanationonthechargesSoframed. Petitioner^{submitted ktis statement oldefense along with} material^{papcrs or-r 18 0'1 2O2'I in thc Officc oi Commissioner'} Endowments^{Departmentlt is not in disputethat disciplinary} proceedings^{are sti1l Pending'}

¶62

During^{the course oi submissions'proceedingsof Office} of the^{Commissioner, Endou'ments Department'dated} o|.oT.2024,havebeenplacedonrecord,u,hereinpetitioner, who w'as^{placeduncle r suspcnsion for irregularities committed} rvhile working^{as Execu[ive Officer' has been reinstatedinto} service'^{pending enquirfinto the matter and he was directed} to work^{as Assistant Commissionerin the Head Office'}

¶63

ll.ItisnotdispuLedthaldisciplinaryproceedingsare pending^{againstpetitioner' who is} "r'orking^asAssistant Commissioner^{inthe l-lead Olfice inthe said department'} Learned^{counsel lbr petitioner contendedthat petitioner is at} fag end of^{sen'rceand due for retrrement on attainingthe age} of superannuation^{in anothert!\ro vears and that disciplinary} proceedings^{at comple ted by an early d'ate and that petitioner} -

¶64

I.\K ,,I \ i' (r l-.t i. : ol 2021

¶65

rs readv ancl q-tlling to cooperatc and parlicipate in the disciplinary. pr,rceedings.

¶66

Having gir,.en a thoughtful consideration to the submissions a dvanced ar the bar. this Court is ol the considered opi rion that intcrcsts ol j usticr: rr.ould be met if respondents lre dircctcd to complcLe the disciplinary proceedings an d pass appropriatc orders preferabl,v r.r,ithin a period of six (0 i) months from thc clatc ol rcccipt of a cop1, of this order and rLre directed so. Neediess to state that petitioner sha11 participare in the disciplinar_r. procee dings rrr.ithout seeking time.

¶67

1J With the a bove observations, Writ petition is disposed of No order as to c )sts

¶68

Miscelianeous petitions, il an-r., per-rding, shalt stand

¶69

dismissed

¶70

To, \

¶71

SD/. K.SREERAMA MU,RTHY ASSISTANTREGITTRAR,,' //TRUE COPYII

¶72

q/ SECTION OFFICER

¶73

The Ptincipal Se cretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkirr Tetahgana state Seiieiai"i, 3t"td or ieianiana. Telangana, Hydr:rabad.

¶74

' I?3"?j[Tissiorrer^{and Director, Endowments Department, Tetanganastate,}

¶75

One CC to SRI SiRtNtVASA RAO MAD|RAJU, Advocate tOpUCl

¶76

Two CCs to Gp l:OR SERVICES ll, High Court for the State of Telangana. lourl

¶77

Two CD Copies.

¶78

6 BSK

GJP

HIGH^COURI'

DATED:1411()12024

.l5#
1. t ttn s lo IA
C'
(
$
(-1 >
i z
IX ril'f iu{
ai
*
rO
,Sp

¶83

ORDER

¶84

WP.No.121'.i8^{ot 2024}

¶85

DISPOSINCi^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

¶86

19ry4 "w

T.Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Venkatesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Srivatsa Krishna, IAS Vs Sri. G. Ashik Kumar, President , IAS

Mohd Abdul Muqeem, Vs The District Educational Officer, State of T.S.

V.Sujatha Vs The State of Telangana

D.Srinivas and 2 Others, Vs Secy., Ministry of Finance,New Delhi, and 2 Others

D. Damodar Rao, Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Mohd.Ishaq Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation