Allowed

T. Sampath, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Jul 2025WP/23229/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the dismissal order of a Junior Assistant. The Court held that the disciplinary authority wrongly invoked Rule 25(1) of the CCA Rules, 1991 to bypass a regular enquiry, as no criminal conviction existed and no reasons were recorded for dispensing with the enquiry. The order was vitiated by violations of natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned dismissal order set aside; petitioner directed to be reinstated into service with all consequential benefits.

T. Sampath, Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t32s2l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 23229 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

T. Sampath, S/o T. Murali, Aged about 54 years, Occ ;Junior Assistant (Now removed), O/o Principal Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal, Rl/o H.No.2-4-86, Ramnagar, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District.

¶10

.....PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep by Principal Secretary IVedical and Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶14

The District Collector, Hanumakonda District, Hanumakonda.

¶15

4- The Principal Kakatiya Medical College, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda Drstrict.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitutron of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari call for the records pertaining to Proceedings vide RC No. E2l36O0l2O21 , dt.2211212o21 issued by the 4th respondent, declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, pervasive, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and violation of Art. 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.

ir-

i-.'

,N 9'

l.A.NO:1 OF 2023

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cor.rr. may be pleased to Suspend the lmpugned Proceedings issued by the 4th resp: rdents vide RC No. E21360O12021 , dt.2211212j21, duly reinstate the petitioner ir o service forthwith, subject to out of the above writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.D.PHANI KUMAR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents : AGP FOR SERVICES - ll

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

I I I

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE^{SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶30

WRIT PETITI ON No.²³²² 90F2^o23

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Heard Sri T.D.Phani Kumar,^{learned counsel} appearing on behalf of^{the petitioner and the learned} Assistant Government^{Pleader for Services-Il appearing} on behalf of the^resPondents.

¶33

2 The et taoner a^{ooroachedthis Cortseekinothe}

¶34

r ver as under:

¶35

".....to issue a Writ, order or direction^more particularly one in the nature Writ of^{Certioraricall for} the records^{pertaining toProceedings vide RC} No.E2l3600/2021, dated^{22-12-2021 issued bv the4th} respondent, declare the^{same as illegal, arbitrary,} pervasive, vlolation of^principles of^{naturaljustice and} violation of Articles 14,^{16 and 21 of the Constitution of} India and consequently^{set aside the sameand} pass...... "

¶36

The case of the^{petitioner,in brief, is that the petitioner} was appointed as a^{Junior Assistant in the 4th respondentMedical} Institution in 1985 and^{servedfor 21 years without any adverse} record. On 22-05-2018.^{a news item in Namasthe Telangana}

¶37

¶38

S N,I A F'.No.232^29,2023

¶39

alleged^{that iake certificates were issued by MGflHospitalstaff} in the^{nameof Erragadda Mental Hospital'Based'ln a report by} the Director^{General, Vigilance and Enforcemendated 2O-A2-} 2020, the^{petitioner was suspended on 21-09-2l20Despite} submitting^{an explanation denying the allegaticrs' respondent} No.3 framed^{charges,and respondentNo'4'\r'Jrl rout assigning} reasonS or^{consideringthe explanation,paSSed t,r cers removing} the^{petitionertrom servic e on 22-12-2021' Ac1 ;rieved by the} same, ihe^{petitionerfiled the presentwrit petitior}

¶40

4. PE SED T^{HE REC} R

¶41

A) The rele va nt DOrt^ion of the D rocel^linqs of the res o en N .4 i.e. Pri nc al K ka aM( dical^colleoe, Ha u ak nd vl e ro ee^tn 2 361) ,/2^o2 1 dated 2 1 20 1i u d he et ao er^hereit ls e racted he u der:

¶42

PROCEEDINGS^{OF THE PRINCIPAL, KAKATIYAMEI)I: \ICOLLEGE'} HAU N^{IVl AKONDA} PTESENT:^{DT.D.MOHANDAS, M.S} PrincrPal/Add^{itional D'M E} '

¶43

Proc. Rc. No.E2l3600/2021

¶44

Daled 'i 12 2027

¶45

sub: -aii".."-.", ESTT-TSlvl&HS^Public Department-GAD^Services- Department^{Report of} ^ lverse^Vigllance News^& Nurnurt"^{Telangana undercapt I )'UDYoGALA}

¶46

prUfi.n"l- '" i<6lnr"r"-aoonoARI^{on 22l0i/2018fake-.Ms'1rcrl l.valrdation} iJiiii-a".^{o".ket issuedbv 6ri T' sAMPATHI Inior Assistant}

¶47

¶48

SN,J W.P.No.23229 2023

¶49

Olo Princrpal, Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal - Appointed Enquiry Officers to conduct detailed enquiry - Enquiry Officers submitted Enquiry Reports Servtces-ORDERS Issued-Regarding. Imposing of Major Punishment of Dismissal from Services - ORDERS Issued Rega rd ing.

¶50

Ref: i. The Pnncrpal Secretary to Govt. General Admin Department, TS, Secretanat Hyderabad, letter No 2204/Ser.A2/2O20, Dt: t4/os/2020.

¶51

2, Rc. No. A5/7315/2020-2 Dated 31/08/2020 of District Collector, Warangal Urban D istrict. 3. Rc. No E2/2171/2020, Dated 77109/2020 of Princrpal, K.tvl.C. Warangal.

¶52

Charge l.4emo Rc, No E2/2t7112020, Dt 2l/09/2020 of Princrpal, Kl4C, W9l.

¶53

5, Rc. No E2/2171/2020, Dated 21109/2020 of Principal, K.M.C Warangal.

¶54

Explanation of the indivrdual, dated 05.10.2020. 7. File No. REV/A 5/M ISC/0001/2020-COLL WGL U, Dt: 05/10/2020 of the Collector & District Magistrat€, Warangal Urban.

¶55

File No. REV/AS/M ISC/O O07/2O2O COLL WGL U, Dt 72/10/2020 of the Collector & Drstrict Magistrate, Warangal Urban. 9. Suspension Order vide Rc. No. E212604/2020, Dt t9/ t0/2O2O of Kl4C, Warangal.

¶56

Enquiry Officer vide Rc. No E21260412020, Dt: 28/lol2020 & 20/11/2020 of KMC, Wgl. 11. Enquiry Report submitted by the Enquiry Officers Dated: 24/Oa/2027.

¶57

Show cause Notice of this office vide Rc. No. E2/36oo/2027, ot 26/ 10/2027

¶58

Explanation of the individual Dated 12/7f12027.

¶59

Rc No. E2/3600/202L, Dt. 04/1212021 of Principal, K.M.C. Hanumakonda.

¶60

Explanation of the individual Dated: 74/72lzOZt.

¶61

/HEREAS, vrde reference 1" to 2"d cited that, the Hon'ble Collector & Drstrict lvlagrstrate, Warangal Urban has directed to take necessary actton as per the recommendations of the Vigilance and Enforcement department report basing on the adverse news published rn Namasthe Telangana darly News Pdper captroned as "UDYOGALA KOSAM ADDADH ARI" on 22/05/2018, alleging involvement of employees of K.M.C./M.G.M., Hospital regarding issued of fake certificates in the name of Erregadda Mental Hospttal, Hyderabad to the Government employees who made request on medical invalidatron grounds.

¶62

¶63

sN,l No.23229²⁰²³

¶64

Sri. T,^{SAMPATH, lLrnror Asslstantof this office workingrrr I} G.lv1 HosPrtal, Warangal^{ts rnvolvedin this case'}

¶65

WHEREAS,^{the power conferred by the subrule( 1) frule of (l C A} Rules 1991,^{the Principal'Kakatrya Medical College' Wa -' ngal is hereby} placed Sri. T^{SAf4PATH,luniorAssrstantunder suspensronu I il further orders} by^{pendingenqulry againsthrm vide reference9'h cited}

¶66

wHEREAS,^{this office has framedArticle of Charq(:againstSri T'} SAMPATH,^{lunior Assistant vide reference 5th cited'}

¶67

WHEREAS,^{rrr accordancewlth reference7'h & 8tn cit: Ithisoffrce has} appointed^{EnquiryOffrcersto conductthe detailed inquiry \rii: reference1Oth} cited.

¶68

WHEREAS,^{the Enqulry Offrcers have submitted deta l:d enquiry report} vide reference^{11rncrted in which the Articleof Chargesfrarr ld aqainst Sri T'} SAMPATH,^{lunlor Assistant (Under Suspension)are proved}

¶69

W H EREAS, thrs office^{has tssuedthe ShowC')i: 3 Noticeto the} rence 12tr'cited^{to called for the explanlron that' why the} individual^{vide refe} of drsmrssal^{of serviceshould notimpo'l(( aqainst him'} major PU^{n ish men t}

¶70

W H EREAS, therndividualhassubmittedtheexplal];llonVidereference 13tf' to^14'hcited.

¶71

After^examine the explanation^{submitted by tf Iindividualvide} refeTence^{15th cited,} the Principal,^{KakatiyaMedicalCcrll€ le' Hanumakonda} )f services^{aga inst} has decided^{to rmposethe majorpunishmentof dismissa} Sri. T. SAMPATH,^{lunlorAssistant (Under Suspension)wi't} mmediate^effect.

¶72

The Office^Su Perin^{te ndent'Accountssectionof tf s offlce is hereby} directed to take^{necessaryactionaccordrngly as per rule:;} r force

¶73

¶74

5N,l W.P.No.23229 2023

¶75

Kakatiya Medical College HANUMAKONDA.

¶76

¶77

Sri T.SAMPATH, Junior Assistant (Under Suspension) R/o. H.No.2-4 86, Ramnagar, Hanu makonda . (By. Regd. Post/Ack due) and I also send through Special lvlessenger.

¶78

Copy to the Supenntendent ofAccounts section of this OFfice for necessary informatron.

¶79

Copy submitted to the Distnct Collector, Hanumakonda for information. Copy submitted to the Director for Medical Education, Telangana, Hyderabad for inFormation,

¶80

Copy submitted to the Director ot public Health & Family Welfare, Telangana, Hyderabad for in formatton.

¶81

Copy submltted to Vrgilance Commrssroner, T.S., Secretariat, Hyderabad for informatron.

¶82

Copy submitted to the Princlpal Secretary to Govt General Admrn Dept., T.S., Secretariat, H ydera bad.

¶83

B) The releva nt Dortion of the order dated O6.12.202L

¶84

passed in W.P.No.12 2 ol 2O2l is extracted hereunder:

¶85

"The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that a perusal of the Rule 25(1) of the Rules, 1991 clearly states that whenever any employee is convicted by the competent Criminal Court, the disciplinary authority need not conduct any enquiry and straight away, based on the conviction, he can be removed. But in the instant case, no conviction has been awarded by the competent Criminal Court and only FIR in Crime No.131 of 2O2t dated 19.04.2021 on the file of Matwada police Statlon, Warangal District, has been registered against the petitioner on the complaint given by the 3,d respondent and the same is

¶86

¶87

SN,I tt .P.No.23229²⁰²³

¶88

pending. Therefore,^{learned counsel for the} petitioner has contended^{that the disciplinary autho'} .y i.e., 3'd respondent ought^{not to have invokedpct} rr:rs u nder .l a major Rule 25( 1) of^{the Rules, 1991 and impc'st} penalty of removal on^{the petitioner'Lear'} rd cou nsel for the^{petitionerhas furthercontendedth't} llule 25 of the Rules,^{1991reads as follows:}

¶89

" 25. SPecial Procedure in certaln^cases: contained in^{Ru t20 to} Notwithstandlng^anYthing Rule 24.

¶90

(i) Where ocnalty is imposed on a^Gov nment i"ruun, on the^{qround of conductwhichI ; I} ed to his conviction^{on a criminal charge, or} (ii) When the disciplinary authorily^{is sa''iI} r:d for i"uto.t to be^{recorded by rt in wrltlngthet} is not reasonably^{practicableto hold an inqui-1} n the manner^{providedin these rules, or}

¶91

(iii) Where the^{governoris satisfiedthal} i,r :he interest of the^{security of the State,i'} s not nanneT expedient to^{hold any inquiry inthe} provided in these Rules,

¶92

,r the The disciplinary^{authoritymay constrl} circumstances of^{the case and makesucr} orders thereon as^{it deems fit:}

¶93

I^{x x x} ]^{(Proviso deleted by G'O' Rt'No'6'1')} Genl. Admn.^{(Ser-C), Dot 29.12.1993)}

¶94

Provided that^{the Commissionshall be;rr sulted'} where such^{consultationis necessary, bef'eany} orders are made^{in any case under thisrul(}

¶95

IProvided^{further that no such consultationI th the} tommission^{is necessarybefore any ori:-s are} made under^{clause(i)of this rulel}

¶96

(Added G.O M.S^{No.240, G'A (5ec-C)Dt:p Dated} 14.08.2003.

¶97

¶98

¶99

5N,j W.P.No.23229 2023

¶100

A perusal of the said Rule clearly states that the disciplinary authority can invoke the said power where an employee has been convicted by the competent Criminal Court or where the disciplinary authority is satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner provided in these Rules.

¶101

B. Moreover, while alleging stigma against the petitioner, the disciplinary authority is bound to conduct enquiry and only after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, the respondents have to pass the impugned orders. But in the instant case, no such enquiry is conducted. Therefore, on these grounds, the impugned order dt.02-04-2021 is liable to be set aside and accordingly the same is set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. It is always open for the disciplinary authority to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law. No costs.

¶102

c) The relevant Dortion of the order dated 04.04.2022 Dassed in W.P.No.16772 of 2 022 is extracted hereunder:

¶103

"The learned counsel For petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated L6.12.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.12902 of 202I and the same is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader for Services-II.

¶104

¶105

5N,.i

¶106

\ / P. N o.23 229 2023

¶107

In view of^{the same and following -he order} passed in the above^{writ petition'the wr t)etitionis} allowed^{in terms thereof, setting aside the impugned} Order vide^{Rc.No.B420IVC-E/2021datecl t7 t'2022} issued by^{the 2nd respondentand f- -therthe} respondents^{are directed to reinstate the pe- roner into} service with^{all consequential benefiis Ho'n':ver'it is} open for^{the disciplinaryauthorityto tal''(r action' tn} accordance^{with law' The miscellaneouspetitions} pending, if any,^{shall stand closedTheres rall be no} order as^{to costs."}

¶108

D) The relevant^{portionof the orderdat! d2} .1 .2022 xtracte e h e reunder: s IN W.P.No.^{26078 of2021 rse}

¶109

10.^{"Having regard to the rivalcontenir- rs and the} material on^{record, this court finds 1l atsimilar} circumstances^{had arisen in W P No'12902'' ct 2O2l and} -ou^rthad vide orders^{dated t6 12'2021,this} considered^{the issue at length and in Par;} Nos.3 to^B has held as^under:

¶110

"3. it has been contended^{by the petiti )ner that} his mother^{was employed as Mult Purpose} Health Assistant^{with the respondent;'andthe} petitioner's mother^{has been retiredc rmedical} invalidation^{groundsvide proceedingsIt 06-12-} 20216.^{Thereafter,the petitionerhas : ubmitted} an application^{on 14-06- zolf lo cc r siderhis} case for appointment^{oncom I lssionate}

¶111

¶112

SN,] W.P.No.23229 2023

¶113

grounds. Thereafter. the respondents were pleased to consider his case for compassionate appointment on compassionate grounds vide proceedings dt.06-07-2017 and subsequenfly the petitioner's services were regularized vide proceedings dt.24-07-2019. While petitioner is discharging his duties as OFfice Subordinate, it has been alleged by the respondents that a news item has been published in the local newspaper on 22-O5-2OLB alleging that some of the employees of M.G.M. Hospital, Warangal, have secured employment by producing fake certificate in the name oF Erragadda Mental Hospital, Hyderabad, and based upon the said news item, the 4th respondent had issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 2l_ lL_2020. Alleging that the petitioner has produced fake certificate at the time of securing employment and that the petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation denying the said charges over the 3rd respondent had straight away imposed orders of removal vide proceedings dt.02-04_ 2021 by invoking the powers under Rule 25 (1) of the Rules, 1991.

¶114

The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that a perusal of the Rule 25 (1) of the Rules, 1991 clearly states that whenever any employee is convicted by the competent Criminal Court, the disciplinary authority need not

¶115

¶116

S N,J .P.No.23229²⁰²³

¶117

conduct any^{enquiryand straight awavbased} on the conviction,^{he can be removed t'r t in the} instant case,^{no convictionhas been a"tt rCed by} the competent^{Criminal Court andorr 1 FIR in} Crime No.131^{of 2O2t dt.19-04-2021cr the file} of Matwada^{PoliceStation, WarangalDr! t - ct' has} been registered^{againstthe petitionc- on the} complaint^{given by the 3rd responderl and the} same is^{pending.Therefore, learned(l('|r nsel for} the^{petitionerhas contendedthat the drs:iplinary} authority^{i.e. 3rd respondent ouqht not fo} 'ave invoked^{powers underRule 25 ( 1) of tl e Rules'} 1991 and^{imposed a majorpenalty} 'l'^removal on the^{petitioner.Learnedcouns€rl for the} petitioner has further^{contendedthat tl rle 25 of} the Rules,^{1991 reads as follows:-}

¶118

"25. SPecial procedure in^{certa in} CASCS: Notwithstanding anything^{contained in RtLll} 20 to Rule 24-

¶119

(i) where^{penalty is imposed on a Cio} ern ment servant on the^{ground of conduct whi:I} has led to his conviction^{on a criminal charge,l-}

¶120

(ii) where the disciplinary^authority s sa tisfiec for reasons to^{be recordedby it in wti} . rg that^it is not reasonably^{practicable to holc} t n inquirY (r in the manner^{provided in theserules,}

¶121

1,1,

¶122

5N,J W-P.No.23229 2023

¶123

(iii) where the Governor is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner provided in these Rules.

¶124

the disciplinary authority may consider the circumstances of the case and make such orders thereon as it deems fii :

¶125

I^{x x x} ]^{(Proviso deleted} by G.O.Rt.No.6421, Genl. Admn. (Ser.-C),Dt.29-12-1993) Provided that the Commission shall be consulted, where such consultation is necessary, before any orders are made in any case under this rule.

¶126

IProvided^{further that no such} consultation with the Commission is necessary before any orders are made under clause (i) of this rule.l (Added by G.O.Ms.No.240, G.A. (Ser-C) Dept., Dt.140B- 2003)

¶127

¶128

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that none of these factors were there in the instant

¶129

¶130

S N,J '<sup>P. No.2 3229-2023

¶131

case and^{nowhere the disciplinary autl-( rity has} assigned^{reasons why it is not practicable1( conduct} enquiry against^{thepetitioner' Whene verthe} disciplinary^{authority is alleging stigma I J )inst the} petitioner, the^{respondentsare bound tlconduct} enquiry so as^{togive opportunitytoirove his} innocence.^{But in this case, no opportunityir given to} the^{petitionerand straight away imposedmaj rr penalty} of removal^{vide proceedings dt'02-04-202L further} directed the^{respondentsto reinstatethe pet I oner with} all consequential^{benefits '}

¶132

Learned^{GovernmentPleader for;ervices-1I} appearing^{for the respondents has contend: J that the} disciplinary^{authority has ample power unde'Rule25 of} the Rules,^{1991 to discernwhetherthe regrr ar enquiry} is required or^{not and the allegation levelledgainst the} petitioner is that^{thepetitioner ha:secured} employment^{on compassionategrounds'I lsed upon} the fake^{medical certificateproducedby his r -rotherand} that the^{show cause notice issued to the F ltitioner is} only after^{following principlesof naturaljusti .e and only} after following^{the due procedure, the lisciplinary} authority^{has imposed major penalty of 't: noval from} service. Therefore,^{the Writ Petition has no merits a nd} the same^{ls liable to be dismissed'}

¶133

Having^{regardto the rivalsubmissions;r rade by the} parties, this Court is of^{the consideredvir: v that Rule} 25 of the Rules,^{1991could not have irrtked by the}

1,3

SN,J

W.P.No.23229 2023

disciplinary authority as none of the three eventualities which were stipulated in Rule 25 are attracting in the instant case and no reason was recorded by the disciplinary authority as it is not practicable to conduct enquiry against the petitioner. Therefore, invoking Rule 25 (1) or Rule 25 of the Rutes 1991 itself is not warranted in the instant case. Therefore, the impugned order of removal dt.02-04- 2021 is set aside as none of the eventualities mentioned in Rule 25 of the Rules are not being attracted in the instant case.

¶138

B. Moreover, while alleging stigma against the petitioner, the disciplinary authority is bound to conduct enquiry and only after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, the respondents have to pass the impugned orders. But in the instant case, no such enquiry is conducted. Therefore, on these grounds, the impugned order dt.02-04-2O2t is tiable to be set aside and accordingly the same is set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. It is always open for the disciplinary authority to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law. No costs".

¶139

E) The Counter affidavi th as been filed on behalf of the Resoondent Nos.1 to 4 and in oartic lar oaraoraoh No.s is extracted here u nder:

¶140

1,4

¶141

sN'l \ t,. No.23229-2023

¶142

"5. It is respectfully^{submitted that' L asinq on} the departmental^{enquiry report the petit t ner was} issued show^{cause notice by Principal Kakati'/r medical} Dated college^{vide letter Rc' No'E2/3600/20 1} 26.70.2021^{proposingthe major punis - Ientof} Dismissal^{from service and to submit explanat on within} 7 days of^{receiptof the notice duly following r.rncrple of} natural JUstice.^{The petitioner in responseto the show} causenoticerequestedtoprovideacopyofltr:enquiry report and^{accordinglythe petitioner was isst:d a copy} of the enquiry^{report for submissionof this '):planation} through^{letter Rc.No.E2/360012021Dated ' '122021'} After recerpt^{of the enquiry report thepe 't t ioneron} r ation and 14.12.2O2t^{has submitted a detailed exp} ' the Princrpal,^{Kakatiya Medical College has p rr-suedthe} explanation^{of the basing on Principlesof na ral justice} and issued^{final orders imposing the major[ -rnishment} of dismissal^{rrom service againstthe pet i ioner and} Rc' issued dismissal^{orderthrough Iroc} No.E2l3600/2021^{Dated 22'12'2021'Th: 'efore the} action of^{the respondentis in accordancevr 'h law and} no illeqality^{or illegality is committedin isuing'the} imposed^{order. "}

¶143

I SCU SSIO^{N ANDcoN CLUSION:-}

¶144

Learned^cun ar on ll half t he etitio rm inl u -fo h he II wln st bmissions:-

SN,I

W .P .No.23229 2023

i) The petitioner, who is a Junior Assistant, is in no way connected with the issuance or validation of certiFicates by the appointing authorities of the concerned department and has been falsely implicated in a case involving the issuance and validation ot fake certificates in the name of Erragadda Mental Hospital to Government employees.

¶149

i,) The petitioner was placed under suspension on 2I.Og.2O2O and, upon being served with a charge sheet, the petitioner submitted his expranation and preaded ignorance. Nevertheress, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No. 319 of 2020 on 31.12.2020 for the alleged commission of orfences punishabre under section s 420, 468, and 477 of rpc.

¶150

iii) The disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner were also based on the same set of allegations. However, a final report was submitted by the Sub_Inspector of police, p.S. Matwada, treating the case as a mistake of fact and accepting the said final report, the VI Additional ludicial Magistrate of First Class, Warangal, vide order dated lB.OS.2022 in Crime No. 319 of 2020 in R.C.C. No. 01/2021, passed a docket order accepting the Final report filed by the Sub_Inspector of police, p.S. Matwada.

5 N,l

\ /^, \ o.21229-2023

iv) In^{view of the fact that a final report was sull 1 ittedbefore} the concerned^{Court treating the case as a mistak: rlf fact' the} disciplinary^{proceedings could not have} beerr^{contin ued'} However,^{to the Petitioner'sshock'the imPugn(r(order dated} 22.72.202I^{vide ProceedingsNo R'C No' EZl3(tol2027was} issued^{by the Principal, KakatiyaMedicalCollege'l- ' rrumakotrda'} imposing^{the malor punrshmenti'e'' dismissal of 1-re petitioner} f rom the^service

¶155

A show^{cause notice vide Rc'No'E2/360-t2O2l'daled} v) 26.10.2O7L^{was issued by the 4th respondenttche petitioner} and the^{petitioner submitted a detailedexplana - )n to the 4th} respondent^{oo 14'12'2021to the said show caus. notice issued} to the^{petitioner' However'withoutconsidering tt (l explanation} furnished^{in response to the said show cause Ir 'tice' a lnajor} punishment^{ofdismissalfrom service was inl rosed on the} petitioner by^{the respondentNo 4 with immediat€)rfect'}

¶156

vi) The^{respondent No 4failed to} verifY^{tt eexPlanation} not consi^{J lrthe sPecific} submitted^{by the petitioner anddid} petitlone'^{';case in the} details furnished^{in support of the} pertained :o^{the charges} explanation^{dated14 12'2021'which} framed^againsthim'

¶157

tffi

¶158

¶159

S N,J w .P .No.23229 2023

¶160

vii) Without conducting disciplinary proceedings in accordance with due procedure, and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing or permitting the petitioner to examine witnesses to establish the truth, a major punishment of dismissal from service was imposed without assigning any reasons. Therefore, the rmpugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶161

Bas do t eaf or sa dsu bmiss ton s, thel ear n u s a ln n al f e n r o t d that theoetitioner i sentitled for the rel ief as praved for bvt eDe tion rt nthepr sentwrit oetitio n.

¶162

6, Learned Assistant Government pleader for Services_iI appearing on behalf of the respondents placing reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalr of the respondents, in particular paragraph No.S, contended that, based on the departmental enquiry report, a show cause notice dated 26.IO.2021 was issued to the petitioner proposing the rmpositlon of the major punishment of dismissal from service, and an explanation was called for from the petitioner. Upon the petitioner's request, a copy of the enquiry report was furnished, and petitioner submitted expranation on 14.72.2027. After perusing the petitioner,s explanation, the principal, Kakatiya

¶163

¶164

I i i

¶165

S N,,J '/⁾ No^23229.2023

¶166

Medical^{College,passedthe impugnedordero1 dismissal on} 22.12.2021^{and the sameis in conformity with t.i tprinciples of} impugned^{l - ler does not} natural^{justice and therefore' the} warrant^{interference by this Court'}

¶167

7 Le rn dAs^istn G ve^rnmen P e ( r, however, q u r wasn t t irl a mits that^{a reqlardeDartmental en} n c ed and the etiti ner w sn I afforded a reas na^{ble op DOrtunitvof hearl nq,norwas le} erml e re rm^DUoned t a ln the^{witnesses.Neve} rthe less, o rw s as ed.

¶168

This Court^{opinesthat the petitioner is enti led to grant of} relief and^{petitioner's services cannot be trl minated in a} summary^{and arbitrary mannerwithoutcom: ying withthe} principles of^natural lustice^{and withoutconclr'r ltinq a regular} enquiry-^{As borne on record' the order of re^ 'oval had been} passed against^{the petitioner attributingmiscon(uct on the part} of the^{petitioner; however,the same had not : len established} through a^{proper enqurry' Therefore'the impuqr ed order' dated} 22.t2.2027^{issued by the 4th respondent is in ( lear violation of} Rule 20 of the^{CCA Rules, since the petiti( ner cannot be} terminated unilaterally^{without due process'}

¶169

%iyffiffiffin,ar

¶170

. ;ffi.:;.iffiffi^. i iffire,, are ir{.}^:il{5-:--1 4

¶171

¶172

SN,J W.P.No.23229 2023

¶173

Learned counsel appearing on behall of the petitioner submits that the decision in W.P. No.12902 of 202t, dated 76.12.2027, has been foilowed by this Court in W.p. No. 16772 of 2022 vide order dated 04.04.2022 and atso in W.p. No.26078 of 2021, vide order dated 29.11.2022.

¶174

10, Taking into consideration the orders of this Court passed under iden tica I circumstances in W.p. No.76772 of 2O22 and W.P. No.26078 of 202L, as well as the judgment in W. p. No.12902 of 2027, this Court opines that the impugned order issued by the 4rh respondent is bereft of reasons and passed in clea r violation of the mandatory procedure required for conducting a regular inquiry, hence, the impugned order is vitiated and is liable to be set aside

¶175

11. TA ING INT o DE T

¶176

A) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,

¶177

b) The submissions made by the learned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government pleader for Services_ff appearing on behalf of the respondents,

¶178

¶179

S N,I W I No.2 32^29-2023

¶180

The averments^{made in the counter affid I vit filed on} c) behalf of^{respondentNos'1 to 4and irparticular'} paragraph^{No.5 (referredto and extractedabo re)'}

¶181

d) The^{impugned proceedings dated 22"1''"2O2tvide} R.C^{No.E2l36O0 /2O2L issued byPrincipa l'Kakatiya} Medical^{College,Hanumakonda addresst d tothe} petitioner^{herein (referredto and extractedat ove)'}

¶182

The order^{of this Court dated O8'O6'2(r::1passedin} e) W.P No.129^{02 of 2021(referredto and extra( ted above)'}

¶183

The relevant^{portion of the order of thi: Court dated} f) O4.O4.2O22^{passed in W'P No'L6772 of 2022 (referred to} and extracted^above)'

¶184

S)^{The relevant portion of the order of thi; Court dated} W'P No'26078^{ot 2O2" ' (referred to} 29.tt.2(l22^passed 'n and extracted^above)'

¶185

h) The discussion^{and conclusionas arriverlat para Nos's}

¶186

to 1O of^the Present^order'

¶187

Th Wri P tition is llowed^{andhe in tpuonedorder} d 2 1 2 2 d R.c o.E2 3 oo :r t2L tss^uedbv

¶188

¶189

5N,j W .P.No.23Z?g 2023

¶190

h R s on den N 4is th t a e d r dt tn t eth e ti n rint r I n e enti enefi ts I t er a e ar a e ts ti ar U h rt lsa b rt a r e actiona qa 1nst th EDetition er, ft he reSDonden ts tn en d o do so tn acco rdance to la w tn c nforml wtth the tn le o na r s tc a t tv d e etiti n n t lt wt u e ur at o n ert e a H I t er h n f t

¶191

costs.

¶192

Miscellaneous applications, iF any, pending shall stand closed.

¶193

SD/. S.MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶198

The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶199

The District Collector, Hanumakonda District, Hanumakonda.

¶200

The Principal Kakatiya Medical College,, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District.

¶201

Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES- il, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶202

One CC to SRI T.D.PHANI KUtt/AR, Advocare IOPUCI

¶203

Two CD Copies

¶204

¶205

TKS Yt-

C.('. TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1010712025

ORDER

o I
/,' ,//\ '-l %,'1,.
s"
,r'r:-
a<br>oC< -
Lr- <br>,& \ ,i
r.f')i'
cl !-l -'./

¶211

WP.No.23229 of 2023

¶212

ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS.

¶213

\D^coR(d 9<rr -t6' ''

T. Sampath, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Sampath, 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

B.Jacob Prem Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Ms. Maloth Sonali Vs State of Telangana

Jajjara Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Kalyani Kumari Vs The Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd.

K. Gangadar Vs The Presiding Officer , Labour Court-Ii and another

Pulipaka Sukuna Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited and 4others