Court in D. Muralidhar v. Central Bank of Ind.iaz, in which it rvirs held that punishment is effective pros

2. Smt. B.VU-aya_Lak9hmi, W/o L_ate B.V.Sfrasad,, Aged about 71 years, Occ. House wife, Fl/o Ftat No 102_,-prithvi Emerald"Apirtments, CariOfriiifagli, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad, T.S -5OOO80

3. Smt. B.Chamundeeswari,_W/o K.Mahesh,, Aged about 50 years, Occ. House wife, Rt/o Flat No. tO!,^ e!!y1-emeratd Apartments, CinOni- N;g;i Kavadiguda, Hyderabad, T.S -SO008O (Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased Sole Petitioner as per Court Order dt o6to6t2o23 in tA.No.O1 / zniil - - - - - - - - - - - .....PETITIONERS AND

1. The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., rep by its Chairman and Managing Director, Kothagudem, Khammam District.

2. The Direction (Personnel), Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem, Khammam District. .....RESPONDENTS 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, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus as under- a) Declare the proceedings in Reference No.CRP/PER/Cl12l4BO, dated 11-03-2003 of the 1st respondent as communicated vide order No.cRP/pER/c112t62o, dated 2443-2003 and the order No. cRPiPER/c/1212192, dated 13-12-2003 of the 2nd respondent as being arbitrary, illegal anc issued in violation of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of lndia b) And consequently, direct the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits c) Direct the respondents to pay suitable compensation to the petitioner for the mental agony and losr; of reputation suffered by the petitioner and Direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 60/o per annum on the amount due calculated from the date of due till the date of actual payment. l.A.NO:1 OF 2004 (WPMP .NO:30020 OF 2004) Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order in Reference No.cRp/pER/ c'.1121480, dated 1 1-03-2003 of tire '1st respondent as communicated vide order No.CRP/PER/c I 1216'20, dated 24-03-03 and the order No.cRp lpEVcl 12t21g2, dated 13-12-2003 of the 2nd respondent so as to enable the petitioner to continue in service. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRt ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVALT , ADVOCATE FOR SRI K,S.V.SUBBA RAO Counsel forthe Respondents : SR L.SUDHEER, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO The Court made the following ORDER ,/' ./, I I THE HON,BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA \IIRIT PETITION No.22E79 OF 200'+ ORDER: This writ petition is filed to declare the proceedings in Reference No.CRP/PER /ClL2l4BO, dated 11.03.2003 of respondent No.1 as communicated vide order No.CRP/PtrR lC/121620, dated 24.03.2003 and the order No.CRP/PER lC/ 1212792 dated 13.12.2003 of respondent No.2 as illegal and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits and to pay suitable compensation to the petitioner for the mental agony and loss of reputation suffered by the petitioner ald to pay interest at the rate of 60/o per arlnltm on the amount due calculated from the date of due till the date of actual payment.

2. Heard both sides. Perused the record

3. Learned counsel for petitioner relied upgn a judgment of the Honble Apex Court in R.Jeeuaratnann lls State of Madrast, in which it was held that the dismissal order passed with retrospective effect is illegal and inoperative. He also relied upon a judgment passed by the Karnataka High I reoe eln lscl ost 2 Court in D. Muralidhar Vs Central Bank of Ind.iaz, in which it rvirs held that punishment is effective prospectively and could rot effect retrospectively from a date e;rrlier than the date of the order.

4. Learned counsel for respondents fiied a letter issued by the Assistant Commissioner dated 20.O2.2023, in .,vhich it is stated that P.F amount was paid on 30.11.200g.

5. On perusal of recorci and on hearing on both rsides, this Court finds l.hat it is just and reasonable to modify the order i.e., penal$, of removal of service from the date of order i.e., from 11.03 :2003 but not from 06.10.1993. In view of the modificatior L of the order, writ petitioner is entitlecl -br service benefits frr>m 06. 10.1993 to 1 1.03.2003 and also for pensionan. l:enefits accordingly and his service from the above perio,l shall be counted only for pensionan, benefits and not for rrny other benefits.

6. During the pendency of the proceedings, writ petitioner died and his LRs were brought on record. Learnerl counsel for petitione r also stated that he is entitled for gra tuity and EL encashm.ent amount. Respondents are directe d to pay '? 200.5 (2) Kart_J {? 3 the same within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7 . Coal Mines Provident Fund Organization is directed to pay pensionary benefits within three months lrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order failing which'they are directed to pay the interest @ 7 .5%.

8. With the above direction, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. P, PADMANABHA REDDY D PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni ollieries ComPanY Ltd.' 2. The Direction (Personnel), Singareni Collieries Company Limited' Kothagudem, Khammam District' Kothagudem, Khammam District'

3. o;; Ct to sRt x.s.v.suBBA RAo, Advocate [oPUC] ; o;; cc to snt NANDIGAM KRIsHNA RAo, Advocate [oPUc] 5. Two CD CoPies To SA l HIGH COURT DATED:1210212025 ORDER WP.No.22879 of 2004 {E Sfn,l ( Y q ) c U 0 7 APir z0 ;15 (\ z o* t- t' i :'a .j- /////r', ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. €