✦ High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
08 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,836 words

Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Government pleader tor Servaces-Ill appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The oetitioner aDDro ached t e Court seekinq the praver a follows: Memo ". . . . . . issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring No. 193s932120/DrA/VC/2023-7, dt 27.04.2023 issued by the 1st Respondent as illegal, arbitrary contrary to the orders of this Honble Court dt 24.0t.2023 in WP. No. 8632/2009 and the TSCS (CC & A), Rules 1991 and passed without proper application of mind and set aside the same and consequentially direct the Respondents to forthwith release full pension gratuity and other pensionary benefits to the Petitioner with interest quantified at 12 percentage PA and pass..." It is speciFic case of the petitioner that the Memo No.

3. 7935932/20/DrA/vC/20231, dared 27.04.2023 issued by the 1't Respondent is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the orders of this Honble Court dated 24.01.2023 passed in Wp. No. 8632 and 2009 and the TSCS (CC & A), Rutes 1991 and 2 passe(l ,^/it1()ut proper application of mind. Aggriev':rl by the said a:tion cf the l't respondent, the Writ Petition ls filed'

4. P-EBUSE DTH E RECORD:- The: A No.193593 2120/DTAlvcl 2023-1. dated 2;7.O tl.2023 ol mouoned Droceedinqs Memo the 111espondent, is extracted hereunder:' In tt^e reference 1 cited, the Director of 'l-rea';tlries and Ar:co r rts, Telangana, Hyderabad ha:; initiated delparl:mental proceedings against Sri K'E rilhmaiah, Dlstrict Treasury Officer (Retd), Distr ict --reasury/ Arlilabad District under Rule 20 of TSCS ICC:L\) Rules, 1991, in respect of allegations pertaining to tayment of pension and gratuity against fake & forge'l defence Pensicrn Payment Orders, without v:riff ing :;pecimen siJnittures of the pension sanctioning authorit,/. 2 lrr the reference 2nd cited, the charged llficer has sr.rbrritted his written statement of def : rce and rercuested to drop further action in the lnat'er. In the rerference 3rd cited, an Inquirinq l\uthr-ity and Pres3rting Officer were appointed. in tht: re'erence 4ih citec, the Inquiring Authority has suLrmitted its Inquiry R 3po rt. 3, 13overnment after careful examinaiion of ::l- e inquiry ropc r1-, issued show cause nollice a I c rg with d sa.Sreement factors, vide reference Sth r:iteJ, to the charged officer to submit his explanatifn ):; to why s ritirtrle action should not be imposed base I on the -eement factors against the inquiry rill)ort. The disa J Cha 'tted Officer has furnished his exple nation on 04.(3.2004, wherein, he has reiterat(ld r s earlier siat,lrnent of defence and requested the '3c,v :t nment to d rop, 'u rther action in the matter. l I i 3

4. Government, after careful examination of the charges framed, written statement of defense, Inquiry Report, explanation of the Charged Officer to disagreement Factors issued by the Government, provisionally concluded that, in view of the nature and gravity of the allegations, it would be appropriate to impose the penalty of 5 o/o cut in pension for a period of 3 years, under Rule 9 of T.S.R.p. Rules, 1980. .N r K.Br (Retd). Distri th r t Trea surv Officer Trea urv. Adit bad Dastrict. is directe d to exola in as to whv the ena ltv of 5olo cut in oension for a oeriod of3 vears under Rul e9ofT .S.R.P. Ru es, 1980. shall not be imoosed. 6. The explanation of the retired officer should reach the Government within 15 days from the date of receipt this memo. If, no reply is received from him within the 6. stipulated time period, it will be construed that if he has no explanation to offer and further action will be taken against him on the basis of the material available with the Government. B, The relevant portion of the ord er of this Court. dated 24.oL.2023 Dassed in W.P.N o.8632 of 2OO9 is extracted h ereu nder: -

7. Therefore. the respondents are directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, without waiting for conclusion of the criminal case pending against the petitioner, fa iling which, the disciplinary proceedings the petitioner shall stand lapsed. in itiated aga inst the re pondents are directed to Thereafter, rele se the oension a nd oensionarv benefits lcf the f wl criminal case er ts pen lnq a If f w s h 4 alltot n atica llvth e Den ion and othel- hrenefits r would be sto Dped ,asDe Rules. prscus9lQ N AND CONCLUSIO N:- 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that impugned memo, dated 27,O4,2O23 of the 1't respondent has to be set aside on the grourt<t that it is contrary to the orderrs of this Court, dated 24.01.2023 passed in W'P'No'81632 of 2009 since on an earlier occasion when the 1>ertitioner approach,rrl this Court, this Court specificially vide the orders o* the Division Bench of this Court, dated 24.Ol..2.Oitil passed in W.P.No'8632 of 2OO9 directed the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated ,rgainst the petitioner within a periotl of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order with a clear stipulation that failing vrrhich without awaiting the conclusion of the criminal pror:eedings pending against the petitioner, the disciplinary proceedirtr;s initiated against the petitionerr s hall stand lapsed. I l I I I i I I I I I I I I I 5

6. Learned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the orders of this Court are dated 24.O1.2023 passed in W.p.No.8632 of 2OO9 and the impugned notice had been issued on 27.e4.2O23 i.e., beyond the period of three (O3) months stipulated in the order of this Court. dated 24.01.2O23 passed in W.P.No.863 2 of 2OO9, predeciding the subject issue and the same is illegal. 7 Thi c rusa I ofr cor !n sth tin tm u ned how-ca en rce r elf e- e e c n a the enoua rv, th l"t r s ef r srnce it was unila tera lly V VI e e show-cau n 27 04.2 23 f the 1st s o he ena I o/o uti sron or err d o d e e rec ndu IN een ut b s e t A t n e a er due aw and edf rth ieli s r f s tW P on. e s ner I 6

8. TAktnS-l nt a) The afor,esaid facts and circumstances of the c ase' b) The submissions made by the learrred rsounsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Governmenrt Pleader for Services-III appe:rring on behalf of l:l're respondents. c) The corttents of the impugned proceedinll!; Memo No.1935932 /20tDTA/VC/2O23-t, daterl 2'z'0zl' 2O23 of the 1't ret;pondent (referred to and extracted ab'ove) d) Ther o?:servation of the Division Bench of this Court, order dated 24.OL.2O23 passed in W.P.No.8632 of 2009 (referred to and extracted above) This C ()U rto rtrnes tha nre-r e c o ncl us ron alrlyed-albv the Government to impose the1t3:naltv of 5olo cut lq the Densronfora oeriod of th ree \/ears as indicatgd-. tn he imo uoned final sh w-cause notice da]Eed-27$4.2023 issued to the petitioner evgp before !_0itialins- anv enouirv on the su biect tssue a nd even oa rticioatinq in an\,_ enquirv bcfsrs thepe titioner arriving-.,{: unilateral conclusion at the threshgld of the of sh W- au o st n for I I , o/o ut u er Ru 7 f m e er od th e 9 f A.P Rev en NR I s nw ran dan her fo rit Peti nt allowed Me o No .193s 932/ 20/DTAlVC /202 -1. dated 2 7.O4.2023 of tmDu ned e 1st res tis t-a e an th res rre ed hwi h en ona r r b en ron e a a L2o/o wl hin 4 weeks fromthed teof recei Dt of coDv oft he order. However there shall be o ord er as to co s. er d f Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. S. MALLIKARJIJNA RAO SSISTANT REGIST SECTION OFFICER

1. Special Chief Secretary, Finance (Vigilance Ce ) epartment, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana The Director of Treasuries and Accounts, State of Telangana, Hyderabad 2 3. One CC to SRI M.SRIKANTH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC s to GP FOR SERVICES- lll, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

5. Two CD Copies To PSK. HIGH COIJRT DATED:0810412025 ORDER WP.No.2490tt of 2023 CO TODAY 1 HE t,Iai 3 I z' Jui ?I'[ t' --::-.-" :111- '-.--a r' () .(. ,+ '.1 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS J(il\---- f 141

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments