Allowed

M. Chakrapani v. The state of telangana

Telangana HC12 Aug 2025WP/16033/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Office Subordinate challenged a major penalty of withholding five annual grade increments with cumulative effect imposed after an inquiry into alleged indecent WhatsApp messages to a colleague, and the rejection of his appeal. Finding the appellate order passed mechanically without deciding the appeal on merits, the High Court set it aside and remitted the matter.

What did the court decide?

Impugned appellate order dated 09.12.2022 set aside; matter remitted to first respondent to decide appeal dated 18.09.2021 afresh with personal hearing, within four weeks; no costs.

M. Chakrapani Vs The state of telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

132521

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY. THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:^'16033 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

M. Chakrapani, S/o. M.Venkataiah Office Subordinate, Age 51 years, The Assistant Director, (HandT) Chenetha Bhavan, Nampally HYDERABAD

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The state of Telangana, rep by The Principal Secretary to Government lndustries and Commerce (Tex), Department, Secretariat, D Btock, 5th Floor, BRKR Bhavan, HYDERABAD 500063

¶13

2 Commissioner of Handlooms and Textiles and Apparels Export Parks Government of Telangana, HYDERABAD

¶14

Director of Handlooms and Textiles and Apparels Export Parks Government of Telangana, HYDERABAD

¶15

4 Regional Deputy Director Handlooms and Textiles Chenetha Bhavan, Nampally, HYDERABAD

¶16

5 District Collector, Warangal Rural District WARANGAL

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue order or orders or Writ or Writs more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in imposing the penalty of withholding five (5) annual grade increments with cumulative effect vide impugned proceedings Rc. No.470l2019-Es dated 23-04-2021 as upheld by the^'lst Respondent vide is Appellate Order Memo No.34BA/ig.A1l2022 daled 0912-2022 and also declare the Section 3 (d) of TSCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 and the Rule 13 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place (Prevention,

¶19

Prohibition and Redressar) Act, 2013 which are arbitrary rrd ilregal based on which the impugned punishment was imposed on the petitioi er.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl M. VENKANNA

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES lV

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

¶24

HON'BLE MRS. ]USTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶25

WRIT PETITION N o.16033 0F 2023

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Heard Sri M. Venkanna, Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Services-IV, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 5.

¶28

2. The^petitioner approached the Court seekinq Draver as under:

¶29

"..-to issue order or orders or Writ or Writs more particularly in the nature oF a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in imposing the penalty of withholding five (5) annual grade increments with cumulative effect vide impugned proceedings Rc.No.47012019-Es dated 23-04-2021 as upheld by the 1't Respondent vide Appellate Order Memo No.348/Vig.A1/2022 dated 09-12-2O22 and also declare the Section 3 (d) of TSCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 and the Rule 13 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 which are arbitrary and illegal based on which the impugned punishment was imposed on the petitioner and to pass...."

¶30

The case of the petitioner as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ petition tn brief, is that the petitioner was appointed as OFfice Subordinate on compassionate grounds by the respondent No.5 and posted to the oFfice of Assistant Director (H&T), Warangal (Rural). The petitioner had been

¶31

¶32

SN, J \P 16033 2023

¶33

alleged to have sent absurd Whatsapp message :rl one smt. D.Sunitha, ADO (H&T) O/o AD (H&T), Warangat ( Flural). The Internal Complaints Committee after conducting t.he enquiry opined that the services oF the petitioner may be st rrendered to the concerned District Collector. Basirrr on the recommendations of Internal complaints corT rittee, the petitioner was issued with charge sheet by the 3'c ,-espondent, subsequently, the Inquiry Officer found the ctr r.ge proved against the petitioner. Later, the petitioner s;r bmitted his representation dated 15.O1.202t against the fir Jing of the Inquiry officer. However. the 2nd respondent witho I considering the representation dated 15.01.2021 of the petitione -, imposed a punishment of withholding of five (5) annual graclr increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner preferred ap I :al to the 1st respondent by way of representation dated 01,( 9t.2021, and reminder dated 30.O5.2022. The 1't responl rnt without appreciating the evidence, without applying his mind, mechanically accepted the finding of the Inclr iry Officer. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached he Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶34

SN, J wP 16033 2023

¶35

¶36

4.P ER SED THE RE ORD.

¶37

(A) h or erl n dof h r s nd n N 2 R N 47 201 -E a d 3 4.202 r d h re nd r:

¶38

ORD ER

¶39

In the reference, 1.r. read above, Sri M. Chakrapani, Office Subordinate, Office of tne a_ssiitant-on"k# f Hlir) Warangat (Rurat) was placed under suspension for posting certain wnatsapp messages to Smt.B. Sunitha, ADO. (H&T) "ffi." ;iih"'A]ri.tunt Direcror (H&T), Warangal (Rurat) on 02.Oz.2Otg at io.Oo-pli"""o on04.02.2019 ar 8.31^pM with embraced and abusJ ,rpurli"r"",ary words and l:l:::q."^{and erfetinsr,ur. p*.onuilid-;J;;i;'r,r"} and feerins very rnsecurity to attend the work in the Offile. ;;il". the Staff members working in the office of rhe Assistirt oi[.,".'ii]aT) Warangat (Rurat) has atso raised serious urr"guiion; u["* 'i.,, r] Chakrapani, office Subordinate, office of rhe Assistant Di.e.t;; Giil, *u.u"nal (Rurat).

¶40

Therefore in the reference 2.d read above, the following article of charge have been fra-med _s_irr, il,"'il. anut.apani office suboridiante office of rh€ _Assistani^{;i[al.'luar; warangat (Rurat)} (Presently under suspensron.;.

¶41

ARTICLE oF CHARGEI

¶42

That the said sri M.chakrapani, office subordinate, whire has working in the Office of rhe_Assistant Oiiect* in-ar), Warangat (Rurat) posted .ufjjn ^-^ natsapp' -' ,urrug"s to Smt. B.Sunitha, ADO (H&TL-Office of-it]J.n=sistanr Director (H&T), 8.31 Warangat PM (Rural) with embraced on 02 O2.1oD and abuseA "i io.oippr^-rnp".f ""a on 04.02.2019 at i"u.n'"ntary words and l::g::g_",.and^{effecringher personatand famity_tife} and feeting verv rnsecurity to attend the work in the office. fu.tnJr,"Smt. B. Rajini, ADO (H&r), atons wirh (04) other staff ;.;t;;';;ik;s the Assistant Direcor (HtIl Wlra,nS_i in.rl'i"i atso raised rn the orfice seriousof atlegations about the indecent Oerra'viour oi brili.cnut.up"ni. office subordinare, office of th e Assistanl D ;;;;i"r" i H;,ij;' Wa ra nsa I ( Rura r).

¶43

By this above mentioned act, he has exhibited lack of integrity, devotion to duty and unbecomrb .r".";;;;;;;"", servanr and

¶44

¶45

SN, J \'P 16031²⁰²³

¶46

and 3(C)^{of the l rlanganaCivil} herebv^{violated Rule3( 1)(2)(3)} ;;;i.;t (conduct)^{rules' 1e64'} .v proceedings In the^{reference 3'd read above' the disciplina} . OfFice of^the i n i ti ati e sentlY^under "'s " "',^{! n *} "tt¹ o'i^?jl ;.?l' i"o,i,.:', i'1' " il : Assistant^{Director(H1ll} 'om."'ov in r osing a^major susDension)^{was disPose} ";;";;'ili, I (:rements with ;:-"'"i;;;i,,wiLhholdins^{of (0s) five annual9ra0e} cu mulative^effect

¶47

Office of^the Further^{Sri M'Chakrapani' Office :''?ol!':-ut''} r district^cadre Assistan't''oir".,ot^{iUarl' Wlrangal (Rural)belongs '} t to the^female ;;-;;:;il,,",i?l-:11""'.i:,.":I';".^{j,""'.:'t'n""';'l} €rtv of^women I &T),^{Wara ngal} :iBlii:E:'_':::Itra:Lti:,i;::",:'::':u C inate,^{Office ot} ( Rural), the^{services.o',i'ri+],} ";;";'r;t i Rurat) ts sr r rendered^{to the} ihe Assistant^{Director( l-} r:t. District^{Collecto', wurungu^t(Rural)wi}r;mmsii3tseff

¶48

uested^{to issue} suitable of the The^{existing posting orders District collector, uutunti to-Sri Iionit" M Warangal Chakrapani' Office Subordinate (Ryt1),]: in SI} '"^{</sup> /arangal rordinate,^{(Rural)in anY} District.}

¶49

\ shall relieve S The Assistant^{Director(H&T)' Warangal (Rurz} of the^Assistant 'ies in his service M ch.i;;;;;;^{oiric" suuo'ainate'from the offic(} Director^{(H&T),warangJ (Rurar) after} before^{making'all'er District(''I} llector,^Warangal reoisters^{with instructron''to} 'epott ioi,-il^{i"r. r,uherPostingorders"}

¶50

s/,) Shallaja^Ramiyer Com^missic '' er H&T^{and AEPs'}

¶51

¶52

The District^{Collector, Warangal (Rural)}

¶53

(B) The imD _g^f e dinqs of the 1tt SDond^nt vid e M .34al Viq.A o 2 d e u e o .L2.^o2ts r t

¶54

Commissioner^of Ha ndlooms & -.1. The^{attention of- the} is Telangana^{:; ate,} - Hyderabad Textiles ' ana RPParet Expod. Parks' the referent^:1" cited^Sri M. invited ,l^{'1r,"'i"r"t"ncescited' 1n}

SN, J \P'ro0rr 2o2l

)

bovernment !^;5li,',:;''##i#t"#lgo/o-reAssisrantDir asainsr,n",f?]? I:'^ni;; ;;;il'.f i?iiT;(I3i"13 ilj ll":u:mt+l,f ,HfT":T.+::ii!::[XTl:irx%^j,illl#i; E2, dared ZS.Oi)O,ii.u,ru^{Apparet Export parks} viOe nc.rrro.<io7Z-Orgl

¶60

_ 2. In the reference 3,d cited, the Commission lextiles and Apparel ern* i,Llj^{ct'c,uullrrrrssroner} of Handlooms & :tTii;lim,[fi :l[?di,il3:i;,,:i:i;,#:t"jrg.,n: ro.rnate' office of the I (flandlooms 2s. o t. 20 20, a & nd Textire<,r was ;;.y3.u^ng"i "ii",r,".l"' #:f^{t-^ijr3',.::i:,.j} withhotding (0;t ;;;"r""r";.t-i1"d^{bv imposins} a major pr";.;;urt';i Proceeding"s ;;;;d, ;;;o'. jaoe.increments with cumutatiru u#u.t ,ia""

¶61

¶62

r D r f

¶63

Governme nt, aJter careful exami petition of Sri M. nation of appeat Assistant Director. r .cnax-rapani,^Office Subordlnate O/o the nandtooms & Textiles) W hereby rejected. arangal, (Rurat) is

¶64

¶65

PRrNCrpAL r..*.ilIi=loTf #[ .,0, ro.,

¶66

Sri M. Chakrapani, Office Subordiante

¶67

O/o of the Asst. Director, (H&T), Warangal (Rural),

¶68

il3ll?lffifff^{missioner or Handrooms & rexrires} and AEps,

.--..........--.

SN. ] \11, 16011²⁰²³

To Tie Principal^{Secretaryto Government'} inJur,ri",^{and Commerce (Tex) Dep-artment'} D-Block,^{5r" Floor'BRKRBhavan'} lL:;;;;;', Hyderabad^{- 500063}

¶74

Respected^Sir,

¶75

le Services^-

¶76

sub:^{public Services -Tela-ngana,} !1*^:r. O/o Assistant Sri Director M^{Chafarapani' Office (H&T) Warangal Subordinate'R'ul'l^'} DePartmental )^{Rules, 1991 -}

¶77

proceedings^{undernute- ZO of']::.,S^,(Ci-8r} er aPPointed^- Article^{of tnal.gelttueO -Inquiry-offi(} najor PenaltY^of

¶78

Inquiry^{reporfclmmunicated - Awarded} lative effect^- tiJJpJs"^{of 5increments withcurr t} onda -^Postings s,it"ni"t"O^{to District Collector} l1nYl" not issued^{-'appeufunderRule 33 (1)'i} )^{of r.S.(cc&A)} Rules,¹⁹⁹¹ -^Submitted' )f the Director^of

¶79

Ref: t^{proc'No 470l19-E2 dated25'O-l^z:?C} Handlooms^{iI Textiles and AEFS' T S '} Flyderabad. rt No.1/iGUEnq

¶80

1. Internal^{complaints committeeRep(} dated^28'06'2020' Warangal^dated

¶81

dated^28'06'2020' Warangal^dated

¶82

3 Inquiry^{Report No 66 /2O2O/Enqutr1} 28'Ll'2020' I I7.12.2O2O

¶83

28'Ll'2020' I I7.12.2O2O^of

¶84

1. Memorandum^{No 470l2019-E2d-ate} the Commissioner^ofHandlooms 3r Textiles,^and rabad.

¶85

app"u^{r r*po J Pa (-s,} ^re]1no111rHv<l' 04.2021^{of the}

¶86

s. Commissioner^proc.rtro.ic "4TOl2otg-82^{of Handlooms and dated Ttl23} tiles and^APParel ExPort^{Parks'T'S HYderbad-} -^ ^- 'iubmltted^{to the}

¶87

o mv^{neprJsentation aated 02'O9-'2O21} 'rt Industries & eiincipal^{Secretary to} -G-overnrn€ Commerce'^{(Tex) T'S'' BRKRBhavar} , Hyderabad.

¶88

submit^hereunder In continuation^{of representatiol} !91-*?-1:.' lervices^{(CC & A)} rnu uro"u]-unoer^{Rule 33 (1)(ii) o: r"lun9?l-1.:l"l-} t:he reference⁽⁵⁾ I increments^with 'll #" i "r,l:1j..","HtrX"| ;:iffi5'Xi', lf cited^{imPosingmaJor.} tn addition^{to the} which'is^{very grievous and unjust} tl,:, District^Collector, .rrrr"iil" "n;ct I[.ff^'r, anqal^{(Ru ra l)has} "''n^{- 9.nt I} -^I H""' r::l;:i'::i':^J"., Waranqal^{(Rura l)ano} r,li for^issuanceof referred^{the matterto District Collector' Hanumakl}

wp roo::_tzlii

postings. But the District -Collector/ Hanumukonda has not issued posting orders so far and I am. not i" i"."ipl'"l ,alary till to date. Hence, I submit my appeal as tollows_

¶93

Before I submit the ground-s for appeal I submit the following facts for favour kind information of tne Oenlvo lent-I ppe llate authority. I submit to state that th:^ l^earn"O, Ol.ipii""rV 'auino.ity is dogmatic and treacherous. He alwavs treated ,u *itn-frluaf,]avellianism with an intention to take punitive mlnd.

¶94

GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:

¶95

I. The learned Inouiring authority never permttted me to cross examine the witnesses Jna .-orpruinu;i il ##"nica,y conctuded his findings based on the version of tne - piesenung Officer much :"t;i[l:?r':i"j?il."t'n"^{rand which .;" il";;;;;uo r-. tn" r"q,.v}

¶96

The rearned disciplinary authority has never examined the report of the learned Ino ,; r" rl",*^j n ;-.: ; ff i' fi : l'gr,.T i: t r, " " :y. J,S[I:J:,J" :,jffi.tr .# penalty of stoppage Five .Increment, ,i,itf_, .Jrrlative effect and surrendered me to the Distrjct Collector, Wururjuf"nural who has not issued posring orders ri, to out" unJ Ju;i";;;,r;".y much against ro th^e_ p rovis io n s of Te I a n g a n a c9!CCaa)- ilri"r'rrl^i.'r_,,"u.n o, nts ro d o u b I e leopardy and gross violation of Art. 21' of C""riiirli"" of India. 3. The Inquiry Officer has not allowed me to cross examine the comptainant. The learned Inqujry Offiif.rJ g;,;f";,n" charged officer like criminal defense lawyer by putting leaJing questions for which there were self incriminating- answersi on thi lvidence appearing against me instead he hims_elf done thl .o-tu o] i.iu.rtor. Therefore, the findings of rhe tearned rnqui.y o#i-cer";;;"r";;", arbitrary and without evidence on record.

¶97

The rearned Inouiring authority has examined smt. B_sunitha being the comptainanr^'and-he h.; ;"i ;;#,n"0 ,n. orher tisted witnesses. I was not given ,^the ^oppo.tr.^{iiv i".i"r, examineeven} the sote witness introduced ov trre oistipri;;.i;;;,;. Further, r submir to stare thar r was mauied by ;;; i;;Jiry ;;;;",. . coush up the information incurpatino nimseti ln'in'e -"1*"'.t"," ir,-" reading questions :Ji:jr,n"^{Inquiry Ofricer. whois not pu.ritt"-a'tooo ro as per} rhe

¶98

The rearned disciprinary authority has never examined the report of rhe tearned Inquiring autfroiity j,1Oi.i"rriV but mechanicalty

SN,^J wP t6033,2023

warded^malor followed ;:;;iloi^the Itoppuq6^{findings Five increments of the learned Inquiry wlth cumulativt:Officeri} .ural) effect^{which besidesis} surrendering^{me to the oistiictcottector'Warangal} rvices^(CC&A) much^{against to tne proviiionof Talangana CivilIl} Rules.

¶103

It^{is a clear case of perjuryand travesty'}

¶104

The^{allegecharge is clear case of travestyof1t} s;tice.

¶105

B The^{findings of the learnedinquiring,authorit} are erroneous personal^"IPSE which^{are not cogent, turmoil to be treated as th(l} DIXIT"

¶106

rrd nothing^but 9. The^{enquiryreport is despicabl-e'-!""::ty'} C'n. opiniori^{of 'tnl p'"'"niing'onicer and pre conceived nc t}

¶107

y is nothing^but 10. The^{reportot the learnedInquiring authori} perfu ncto^rY

¶108

superimpose^its I 1. The^{learned disciplinarya uthority'.shouldn')} iaeas^{ain-J r.r1rl" do*n the discretion to an illusion'}

¶109

12.^{The alleged charge is either lecayse i: "vas formed on} o-r tnit^{there- v as a total lack of} extraneous^{or irrelevant t'."t;;t;"t;;} il,?JJ#;i^{.i"Jt" the question or allesed charse}

¶110

The^{allegedcharge is purely libelous natL-e but not based} on any^{fact of law or shred of evidence'}

¶111

14' The^{conclusion of the learned Inquiry Offt : rr is not basedon} evidence^{even if some} "f:i^{i;;;;;;io be'irrelevart or extraneous to} the matter

¶112

15.^{Though lmposition of the penalty} "^{is-he right of the} disclolinary^{aurhority, it Jh'o"urO i" tlntii"ntwith t rr: maqnitude and} in support^therr:f' misconduct^{impute and tn"} "uia"nt" be^permittedto 16. In^{this connection'Imay alsokindly} :upreme^{court ot} menti#nere,^{iii,inut the verdict of the Ho'n'blc} r'^{proceedings tor} i"i',.' *',n-^{*nard to the DepartmentalDisciplinart} favou r^{of readY reference'}

¶113

"Hon'ble^{Supreme Court hetd that "it is o,f} fimost^importance oublic^servant,a that in'i"tiri^{tnl disciptinarv action aqainstth2} qain* him^the ';:;r:p;:;^';;;"kmenrat inquiri must^{be hetd t}

SN. J wP t6031 2021

departmental enquiry^{is not an empty formality"" (IAGDEESHPRASAD} SUCCENA Vs STATE^{OF MADHYAPRADESHAIR 1961. S.C' 1070")}

¶118

Though imposition of the^{penaltyis the right ot the} disciplinary authority, it should^{be consistent with the magnitudeand} the misconduct impute^{and the evidenceln support thereof (Govt'of} A.P Vs. B.Ashok Kumar, L997⁽²⁾ S1,238^{(SC) 1997 (4)SLR 242 (SC).}

¶119

In view of the above^{judgmentof Hon'ble SupremeCourt of} India, imposition of stoppage of^{Five increment with cumulativeeffect} ls clear case of inconsistent with^{the magnitude and the misconduct} impute in my case.

¶120

In view of my above averments, I^{requestthe benevolent} appellate authority to kindly^{examinemy coherent Appealin} accordance with the rules^{in force and drop the punishmentimposed} for which act of kindness I shall^{be highlygrateful to the benevolent} authority..

¶121

Be pleased to consider, Sir.

¶122

Yours Fa ith fu llY. (M.CHAKRAPANI) Office Subordinate O/o. Asst. Director^{(H &T)} WARANGAL^(Rural) Surrendered to District^Collector, Warangal⁽ Rural)

¶123

DISC USSION A D CONCLU SION

¶124

The learned counsel appearing on^{behalf of the petitioner} submits that against the^{impugnedproceedings dated} 23.04.2021, issued by the^{2nd respondent,the petitioner} preferred appeal dated 18.09.2021 to the^{1st respondent herein} under Rule 33^{(1)(ii)oF TelanganaCivil Services (CC&A)Rules,} 1991 putting Forth several^{pleas primarilycontendingthat the}

¶125

¶126

SN. J u,P r60l.l 2021

¶127

award of the major penalty of stoppage of 5 irr, rements with cumulative effect is inconsistent with the magn :ude and the misconduct imputed to the petitioner and the evidr: r,:e in support thereon and further the departmental enquiry ir i iated against the petitioner was an empty formality. But, ho,,r:ver, without considering the several pleas put forth by the pr: itioner in the appeal dated 18.09.2021 preferred by the petitior:r before the 1't respondent against the impugned order date. l 23.O4.2021 passed by the 2nd respondent, the order imc tgned dated 09.12.2022 of the 1't respondent is passed withou- rpplication oF mind in a mechanical manner. The order impugr erd of the 1st respondent dated 09.12.2022 is bereft of any rea!;( ns, though it is stated at para No.3 of the impugned order datr: I 09.12.2022 of the 1't respondent that the appeal preferred by he petitioner had been examined and it has been observed th I it is a time barred petition. But, however, a finding is giver in the said impugned order dated 09.12.2022 of the 1'r respondent indicating that a lesser punishment is imposed on r1e petitioner compared to the gravity of the charge held proverr against the petitioner and contends that the appeal petition of l1e petitioner had been examined not on its own merits but solely )ased on the

) \

SN, J wP r60i3 2023

remarks/report of Commissioner oF Handlooms and Textiles and Apparel Export Parks. Telangana State Hyderabad without appreciating the evidence on record.

¶132

The learned counsel appearing on behalF of the petitioner submits that in view of the fact that the order impugned dated 09.12.2022 oF the 1't respondent is bereft oF reasons, the subject matter has to be remitted back to the 1st respondent for passing appropriate orders on merits duly considering all the pleas put forth by the petitioner in the appeal petition dated 18.09.2021 to the 1st respondent herein.

¶133

The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that in view of the fact that there had been a delay on the part of the petitioner in preferring the appeal on 18.09.2021 against the impugned order dated 23.04.2027 of the 2nd respondent before the 1't respondent, observing the same, the appeal preferred by the petitioner had been rejected by the l't respondent.

¶134

A bare^perusal of the Dara no.3 of the impuqned order dated 09,L2,2O22 of the l't respondent indicates that thousi an observation is made that the appeal

¶135

¶136

SN, J \1P 16013 2023

¶137

oreferred bv the oetitioner is a time barred retition Yet certain findinos ad been r corded ao aanst tt e--pctrtlslcr herein on merits holdinq thata les r Du rishm nt is rmoo sed on the petitioner como ared to the q1 avitv of the har eh rove ainst th ition I

¶138

A bare perusal of the copy of the appeal prt: erred by the petitioner before the 1't respondent herein ref:.red to and extracted above aggrieved against the award of mar_ )r penalty of stoppage of five increments with cumulative ,_.ffect vide proceedings dated 23.04.2001 passed by the 2,, respondent indicates that the said pleas have neither been r< F,-.rred to or considered or examined by the 1'L respondent herei r

¶139

The lea rned Assista nt Govern men' PI ader ADDeari no onbehalf of the resoo ndents does r .ot d isoute efa as born onr d that the r eferred bv the oetitioner dated 18.O9.2O21 admittedlv hi1 lnotb en decided on meri ts dulv co n siderinq all the ,!eas out forthbv the oet t o ner r n the a o Deal dated : 8.O9.2021 Dreferred bv the Detitioner before the 1"t ! esDon dent aoainst th order dated 23.O4.202 1 oa ed he 2nd

ali. .^.. !:::., w 7

SN, J wP 16031 2023

I t

resDondent and fairlv submits that the matter could^be remitted back to the 1tt respondent for reconsiderationof

¶145

the subiect issue afresh aqain in accordance to^law.

¶146

Takinq into consideration:

¶147

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

¶148

case,

¶149

(b) The submissions made by the learned counse! appearing on behalf of the^petitioner and the^learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respon dents,

¶150

(c) The contents of the appeal petition preferred by the petitioner dated 18.O9.2021 before the 1st respondent against the order dated 23.O4.2021^passed by the^2nd respo n dent,

¶151

¶152

(d) Para 3 of the impugned order dated 09.L2.2O22 of the 1't respondent,

¶153

The writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 09.12.2022 is set aside and the matter^{is remitted} back to the 1't respondent herein. The 1't^respondentis directed to reconsider the appeal^{petition dated}

¶154

¶155

SN, J \P t6013 2023

¶156

L8.O9.2O2L preferred by the petitioner again st the order dated 23.O4.2021 passed by the 2nd rer pondent, tn accordance with law, in conformity with I rinciples of natural justice by providing an opportunitl, of personal hearing to the petitioner duly considering all I he pleas put forth by the petitioner in the appeal pr::ition dated 18.09.2021 and pass appropriate orders, wit rin a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and duly communicate the decir; on to the petitioner. However, there shall be no order a: to costs.

¶157

The miscellaneous applications, pending if ar y, shall sta nd closed. r l rnalifrEHule Nisi^{has been made absolute as statedabov}

¶158

Witness the HON'BLE^{THE CHIEF JUSTTCE SRIAPARES'r} KUMAR SINGH, on this Tuesday,^{The TwelfthDay of August, Two Thousandand'} wenty Five

¶159

st) -K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASil^,l TANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

CTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary to^{Government lndustriesand )'rmmerce(T-ex)'} oepartniefilitite otr6tangana,^{Secretariat,D Block,5 h Floor, BRKR} Bhavan, HYDERABAD 500063

¶164