M. Chakrapani v. The state of Telangana

: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 the concerned District Collector. Basirrr recommendations of Internal complaints corT rrendered to on the rittee, the petitioner was issued with charge sheet by the 3'c ,-espondent, subsequently, the Inquiry Officer found the ctr against the petitioner. Later, the petitioner s;r r.ge proved 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 appreciating the evidence, without applying mechanically accepted the finding of the Inclr rnt without his mind, iry Officer. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached he Court by filing the present writ petition. .)

4.P ER SED THE RE ORD. SN, J wP 16033 2023 (A) h or erl R N 47 201 -E n dof h r s nd n N 2 a d 3 4.202 r d h re r: ORD ER 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) ;iih"'A]ri.tunt Direcror (H&T), "ffi." 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 erfetins r,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). 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.;. ARTICLE oF CHARGEI .ufjjn posted ,urrug"s That the said sri M.chakrapani, office subordinate, whire working in the Office of rhe_Assistant Oiiect* in-ar), Warangat (Rurat) ^-^ *natsapp' -' Smt. B.Sunitha, ADO (H&TL-Office of-it]J.n=sistanr Director (H&T), Warangat (Rural) on 02 O2.1oD "i io.oippr ""a on 04.02.2019 at 8.31 PM with embraced and abuseA i"u.n'"ntary words and l::g::g_",.and effecring her personat and 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 rn the orfice of the Assistant Direcor (HtIl Wlra,nS_i in*.rl'i"i atso raised serious 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). By this above mentioned act, he has exhibited lack of integrity, servanr and devotion to duty and unbecomrb .r".";;;;;;;"", -rnp".f 4 SN, J \\'P 16031 2023 and 3(C) of the l rlangana Civil herebv violated Rule 3( 1)(2)(3) ;;;i.;t (conduct) rules' 1e64' ! n * In the reference 3'd read above' the disciplina i n i ti ati o'i^?jl ;.?l' i"o,i,.:', i'1' " il : "'s " "', Assistant Director (H1ll "tt 1 'om."'ov in r susDension) was disPose ;:-"'"i;;;i,,wiLhholdins of (0s) five annual 9ra0e I cu mulative effect ";;";;'ili, Further Sri M'Chakrapani' Office :''?ol!':-ut'' Assistan't''oir".,ot iUarl' Wlrangal (Rural) belongs ' ;;-;;:;il,,",i?l-:11""'.i:,.":I';". j,""'.:'t'n""';'l :iBlii:E:'_\':::Itra:Lti:,*i;::",:'*::':u ( Rural), the services. o',i'ri+], "*;;";'r;t i Rurat) ts sr r ihe Assistant Director ( l- District Collecto', wurungu^t (Rural) wi*r;mmsii3ts eff The District collector, Warangal (Ryt1),]: '" suitable posting orders to-Sri M Chakrapani' Office SI of the existing uutunti Ii onit" Subordinate in \ District. The Assistant Director (H&T)' Warangal (Rurz M ch.i;;;;;; oiric" suuo'ainate' from the offic( Director (H&T), warangJ (Rurar) after making'all'er I before District ('' reoisters with instructron''to 'epott ioi,-il i"r. r,uher Posting orders " s/,) Com missic '' .v proceedings . OfFice of the e sentlY under osing a major (:rements with Office of the r district cadre t to the female €rtv of women I &T), Wara ngal C inate, Office ot rendered to the r:t. uested to issue rordinate, in anY /arangal (Rural) \ shall relieve S of the Assistant 'ies in his service llector, Warangal Shallaja Ramiyer er H&T and AEPs' To The District Collector, Warangal (Rural) (B) The imD SDond nt o .L2. o 2ts vid e M t r _gf e 1tt .34al Viq.A o 2 d e u e ' -.1. The attention of- the ana RPParet Expod. Parks' ,l '1r,"'i"r"t"nces cited' 1n Textiles invited Commissioner of Telangana :; ate, the referent : 1" - Ha ndlooms Hyderabad cited Sri & M. \ 7 ) bovernment asainsr,n",f?]? I:' ni;; ;;;il'.f i?iiT;(I3i"13 ilj !^;5li,',:;''##i#t"#l*go/o-*reAssisrantDir ll":u:mt+l,f ,H*fT":T.+::ii!::[XTl:irx% j,ill*l#i; Apparet Export parks viOe nc.rrro.<io7Z-Orgl E2, dared ZS.Oi)O,ii.u,ru SN, J \\P'ro0rr 2o2l

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: (flandlooms & Textire<,r "ii",r,".l"' #:f t-^ijr3',.::i:,.j ng"i 2s. o t. 20 20, a nd was ;;.y3.u bv imposins a major pr";.;;urt';i withhotding (0;t ;;;"r""r";.t-i1"d Proceeding"s ;;;;d, ;;;o'. jaoe.increments with cumutatiru u#u.t ,ia"" ro.rnate' office of the I 3 r r f D

4. Governme petition of Sri M. Assistant Director. r hereby rejected. nt, aJter careful exami .cnax-rapani, Office Sub nandtooms & Textiles) W nation of appeat ordlnate O/o the arangal, (Rurat) is To PRrNCrpAL r..*.ilIi=loTf #[ .,0, ro., Sri M. Chakrapani, Office Subordiante O/o of the Asst. Director, (H&T), Warangal (Rural), il3ll?lffifff missioner or Handrooms & rexrires and AEps, .--..........--. SN. ] \11, 16011 2023 D ferred 6 (c) Th EA e iti nda 1 9 zot'..L b th etiti n rl xtra e h r u d r To Tie Principal Secretary to Government' inJur,ri", and Commerce (Tex) Dep-artment' lL:;;;;;', D-Block, 5r" Floor' BRKR Bhavan' Hyderabad - 500063 Respected Sir, sub: public Services - Tela-ngana , !1*^:r. Sri M Chafarapani' Office Subordinate' Director (H&T) Warangal R'ul'l^' proceedings under nute - ZO of']::.,S^,(Ci-8r Article of tnal.ge lttueO - Inquiry-offi( Inquiry reporf clmmunicated - Awarded tiJJpJs" of 5 increments with curr t s,it"ni"t"O to District Collector l1nYl" not issued -'appeuf under Rule 33 (1)'i Rules, 1991 - Submitted ' Ref: t proc'No 470l19-E2 dated 25'O-l^z:?C Handlooms iI Textiles and AEFS' T S ' 2. Internal complaints committee Rep( 3 Inquiry Report No 66 /2O2O /Enqutr 1 28'Ll'2020' 4. Memorandum No 470l2019-E2 d-ate the Commissioner of Handlooms app"u r r*po J Pa (-s, ^re]1no111rHv<l' s. proc.rtro.ic "4TOl2otg-82 dated 23 Commissioner of Handlooms and Ttl ExPort Parks' T'S HYderbad- -^ ^- o mv neprJsentation aated 02'O9-'2O21 eiincipal Secretary to -G-overnrn€ Commerce' (Tex) T'S'' BRKR Bhavar dated 28'06'2020' In continuation of representatiol !91-*?-1:.' rnu uro"u]-unoer Rule 33 (1)(ii) o: r"lun9?l-1.:l"l- '*ll #"* i "r,l:1j..","HtrX"| ;:iffi5'Xi', lf cited imPosing maJor. which'is very grievous and unjust .rrrr"iil" "n;ct I[.ff 'r, tl,:, "''n Waranqal (Ru ra l) ano referred the matter to District Collector' Hanumakl - 9.nt I - I H""' r::l;:i'::i': J"., le Services - O/o Assistant DePartmental ) Rules, 1991 - er aPPointed - najor PenaltY of lative effect - onda - Postings ) of r.S.(cc&A) )f the Director of Flyderabad. rt No.1/iGUEnq Warangal dated I I7.12.2O2O of 3r Textiles, and rabad. 04.2021 of the tiles and APParel 'iubmltted to the 'rt Industries & , Hyderabad. submit hereunder lervices (CC & A) t:he reference (5) I increments with tn addition to the District Collector, anqal (Ru ra l) has r,li for issuance of v 7 wp roo::_tzlii postings. But the District Hanumukonda has not issued posting orders so far and I am. not i" i"."ipl'"l ,alary till to date. -Collector/ Hence, I submit my appeal as tollows_ 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. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: - 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 2. The rearned disciplinary authority has never examined the report of the learned Ino r" rl",* j t r, " n ;-.: ; ff :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. i' fi : l'gr,.*T i: " ,;

3. The Inquiry Officer has not allowed me to cross examine the comptainant. The learned Inqujry Offi*if.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. ,

4. 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 iiv i" .i"r, examine even the sote witness introduced ov trre oistipri;;.i;;;,;. Further, r submir ^oppo.tr. 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. who is not pu.ritt"-a'to oo ro as per rhe 5. The rearned disciprinary authority has never examined the report of rhe tearned Inquiring autfroiity j,1Oi.i"rriV but mechanicalty I 8 followed the findings of the learned Inquiry Officer i Itoppuq6 Five increments wlth cumulativt: ;:;;iloi surrendering me to the oistiict cottector' Warangal much against to tne proviiion of Talangana Civil Il Rules.

6. It is a clear case of perjury and travesty' 7. The allege charge is clear case of travesty of 1t B The findings of the learned inquiring,authorit which are not cogent, turmoil to be treated as th(l DIXIT"

9. The enquiry report is despicabl-e'-!""::ty ' 'onicer and pre conceived nc t 'tnl p'"'"niing opiniori of

10. The report ot the learned Inquiring authori perfu ncto rY SN, J wP t6033,2023 warded malor effect besides .ural) which is rvices (CC&A) s;tice. are erroneous personal "IPSE rrd nothing but C'n. y is nothing but superimpose its I 1. The learned disciplinary a uthority'.should n') iaeas ain-J r.r1rl" do*n the discretion to an illusion' 12. The alleged charge is either lecayse extraneous or irrelevant t'."t;;t;"t;; o-r tnit there- v as a total lack of il,?JJ#;i .i"Jt" the question or allesed charse i: "vas formed on

13. The alleged charge is purely libelous natL-e but not based on any fact of law or shred of evidence' 14' The conclusion of the learned Inquiry Offt : rr is not based on i;;;;;; io be'irrelevart or extraneous to

15. Though lmposition of the penalty evidence even if some "f:i the matter is -he right of the disclolinary aurhority, it Jh'o"urO i" tlntii"nt with t rr: maqnitude and misconduct impute and tn" be permitted to :upreme court ot r' proceedings tor

16. In this connection' I may also kindly menti#nere, iii, inut the verdict of the Ho'n'blc i"i',.' *',n- *nard to the Departmental Disciplinart favou r of readY reference' in support therr:f' "uia"nt" " "Hon'ble Supreme Court hetd that "it is o,f that in'i"tiri tnl disciptinarv action aqainst th2 ';:;r:p;:; ';;;"kmenrat inquiri must be hetd t fimost importance oublic servant, a qain* him the \ 9 SN. J wP t6031 2021 departmental enquiry is not an empty formality" " (IAGDEESH PRASAD SUCCENA Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AIR 1961. S.C' 1070")

17. Though imposition of the penalty is the right ot the disciplinary authority, it should be consistent with the magnitude and the misconduct impute and the evidence ln support thereof (Govt' of A.P Vs. B.Ashok Kumar, L997 (2) S1,238 (SC) 1997 (4)SLR 242 (SC).

18. In view of the above judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, imposition of stoppage of Five increment with cumulative effect ls clear case of inconsistent with the magnitude and the misconduct impute in my case. In view of my above averments, I request the benevolent appellate authority to kindly examine my coherent Appeal in accordance with the rules in force and drop the punishment imposed for which act of kindness I shall be highly grateful to the benevolent authority.. Be pleased to consider, Sir. Yours Fa ith fu llY. (M.CHAKRAPANI) Office Subordinate O/o. Asst. Director (H &T) WARANGAL (Rural) Surrendered to District Collector, Warangal ( Rural) DISC USSION A D CONCLU SION

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that against the impugned proceedings 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 Telangana Civil Services (CC&A) Rules, 1991 putting Forth several pleas primarily contending that the l0 SN. J u,P r60l.l 2021 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 ) \ 1l 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.

6. 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.

7. 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. 8. 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 t2 SN, J \\1P 16013 2023 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 ainst th ition I

9. 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

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

23.O4.202 1 oa he 2nd ali. . .. !:::., w7 l3 SN, J wP 16031 2023 resDondent and fairlv submits that the matter could be remitted back to the 1tt respondent for reconsiderationof the subi ect issue afresh aqain in accordance to law.

11. Takinq into consideration: (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (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, (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, (d) Para 3 of the impugned order dated 09.L2.2O22 l of the 1't respondent, 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 respondent is directed to reconsider the appeal petition dated I t t4 SN, J \\P t6013 2023 L8.O9.2O2L preferred by the petitioner again st the order dated 23.O4.2021 passed by the 2nd accordance with law, in conformity with I rinciples of natural justice by providing an opportunitl, of personal rer pondent, 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. The miscellaneous applications, pending if ar y, shall sta nd closed. rnalifrEHule Nisi has been made absolute as stated abov r l Witness the HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTTCE SRI APARES'r this Tuesday, The Twelfth Day of August, Two Thousand and ' st) -K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASil ,l TANT REGISTRAR KUMAR SINGH, on wenty Five //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary to Government lndustries and )'rmmerce (T-ex)' oepartniefilitite otr6tangana, Secretariat, D Block, 5 h Floor, BRKR Bhavan, HYDERABAD 500063

2. Commissioner of Handlooms and Textiles and Apparerl ; Export Parks Government of Telangana, HYDERABAD

3. Director of Handlooms and Textiles and Apparels Expc 1 Parks Government of Telangana, HYDERABAD

4. Reoional Deputy Director Handlooms and Textiles Che retha Bhavan' NairpallY. HYDERABAD

5. District Collector, Warangal Rural District, WARANG,\ - 6. one cc to sRl. tvl VENKANNA, Advocate [OPUC] .-

7. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES lV ,High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CD Copies I]AN BS t0 HIGH COURT DATED:1ztOBtzOzS )C TODAY ORDER WP.No.16033 of 2fi2 \ c LL \ \ IT s * *$ t ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS 9 , Db