ATHRAM RAVINDER v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass an order, or orders, direction or issue a writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, Declaring the Proceedings issued by the Respondent No.4 herein vide Rc.No.241Bl2O17lS1 Daled.151312025, for recovery of total amount of Rs.15,14,638-00 as lumpsum in one lnstallment from the petitioner, in order to implement the orders passed by the Respondent No.3 vide Proceedings No.226112019/S6/K3 (i) dated. 22-6-2023 during pendency of statutory appeal dated. 05-07 -2024 befo re the respondent no.2 is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14,21 of the constitution of lndia and against the mandatory provisions of Telangana Civil Services (CCA) Rules 199 j , and consequently set aside the said impugned order dated. 15-03-2.025. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in r;upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned Proceedings issued by the Respondent No.4 herein vide Rc.No.2418i2017lS1 t)ated. 15-3-2025, for recovery of total amount of Rs.15,14,638-00 from :he petitioner in order to implement the proceedings of Respondent No.3 vidr; No.226112019/S6iK3 (i) dated. 22-6-2023, pending disposal of main W P. in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitiorrer: SRI S.CHANDRASEKHAR Counsel forthe Respordents: GP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following: ORDER r1 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHU/AR RAO WRIT PETITION No.923O of 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is fited seeking the following reliet "..-...to issue wit order or direction more particularlg one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMIJS dectaing the proceedings issued bg th-e Respondent No.4 l@rein uide Rc No.241B/2O17/51 Dated 15/3/2025 for re(nlery of total amount of Rs-15,14,638-00 a.s Iumpsum in one Installment from the petitianer in order to implenent the orders passed bg the Respondent No.3 uide Proceed.ings No.226 1 / 20 1 9/ 56/ K3 (i) dated 22-O6.2023 during pendencg of statutory appeal dated O5.O7-2O24 before the respondent no.2 b illegal arbitrary uiolatiue of Article 14, 2 1 of the C,anstitution of Indid and agairlst the mandatory prouisions of Telangona Ctuil Seruices CCA Rutes,1991 and consequentlg set aside the said impugned order dated 15.03.2025 anrl pass such order or orders-"

2. Heard Mr. S.Chandra Sekhar, learned counsei for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Forest Department appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

3. karned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the Proceedings dated 15.03.2025 vide Rc.No.241812017/51, issued by respondent No.4 for recovery of an amount of Rs.15,14,638/- as lumpsum in one installment from the petitioner's salary, in order to implement the order dated 22.06.2023 vide Proceedings No.2261 12019/56/K3 (i) passed by respondent No.3. Hence, the writ petition. 'I 2 wP_9230 2025 RRN, J lramed ,:ounsel for the petitioner further submits that the 4. petitioner was appointed as a Forest Watcher in the year 1988, subsequently was promoted to various posts, including Forest Beat Oflicer and For:st Section Officer. In the year 2015, the petitioner was promoted co the post of Forest Section Officer. It is further submitted that the petitioner served as a Forest Section Officer at Rebbena Range, Takkelapally, Kumuram Bheem Asifabad District, from July 2016 to July 2024. Presently, he has been working as a Forest Section Ofiicer, Ginnedari Range, Forest Office 'Division, Asifabad. Durir.g his tenure, a plantation scheme was carried out near T\rngeda Village Reserve Forest Area' Despite multiple attempts to plant saplings, including replacements in 2018, the plants failed to survive. The petitioner duiy informed the Forest Range Ofhcer regarding the rron-survival of the plants, and higher oflicers also visited the site and after conducting soil test, it is found that the plants are not surviving. However, respondent No.3 initiated disciplinary pro:eedings against the petitioner alleging negligence in maintaining ttLe plaltation and imposed punishment, which included reduction to a lower time scale of pay for a period of two years.

5. Learne d counsel for the petitioner further submits that aggrieved by the discipli;efry proceedings, the pel.itioner {iled a 3 wP 9230_20?s RRN, J statutory appeal before respondent No.2, which is still pending. Despite the pending appeal, without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to avail the legal remedies, respondent No.4 issued an impugned order dated 15.O3.2O25 vide Rc.No.2418/2O17 lSl, directing the Forest Divisional Ofhcer, Asifabad, to recover an amount of Rs. 15, 14,638/- from the petitioner's salary in a lump sum in one installment. It is further submitted that the petitioner made a representation on 24.03.2025 to respondent No.2 with a request to stop the impugned order issued by respondent No.4. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition to challenge the order of recovery issued by respondent No. 4, requesting to set aside the impugned order dated 15.03.2025. t

6. On perusal of the record, it is found that this Court on ( 26.03.2025, granted stay of recovery for an amount from the salary ( of the petitioner till the next date of hearing. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the appeal is still pending before respondent No.2. 7 . At this juncture, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that once the appeal filed before respondent No. 2 is disposed of, the petitioner is iiable to approach this Court if aggrieved by the decision. .1 4 wP_9230 2025 RRN, J

8. Having considered the submissions made by both the leamed counsel for parties and without going into merits of the case' .respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the appeal and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law' within a period of four (O4) weeks froni the date of receipt of a copy of this order and also directednottorecoverallyamountfromthepetitionertilldisposal of the appeal g. With the above direction' the Writ Petition is disposed of' No order as to 'losts As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending' if any' shall stand closeC //TRUE COPY// 'si,'I,ll+'#t!3i1"J ":;;-z#. / \ To, Telangana.

1. The Principle S;ecretary' Forest Department' Secretariat' Hyderabad' State of or Forest' Head or Forest Force' Aranva ' ;H*:s'5,?j,:!',"1r::i:3#1tor 3. The Chief Oonservator of Forest' Kaleshwaram Circle' Jayshankar 4. The District Fcrest Officer' District Komarambheem Asifabad' s. The Forest Di.,,isional officer, Asifabad, District Komarambheem Asifabad' 6. One CC to SFI S CHANDRASEKHAR' Advocate IOPUCI 7 Two 695 1e tiP FOR FORESTS' High Court for the State of Telangana at BhooPalPallY L)lstncr' HYderabad [OUT]

8. Two CD CoPir:s BSR LS 1W I HIGH COURT DATED:0310412025 -I FE SIA .O ( c J t ($( 11l,PB 2m v z I D SSrrarCH c9 * ORDER WP.No.9230 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS l1 ltlo