The High Court · 2025

Order

Heard Sri Nayakawadi Ramesh' learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner' learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I' appearing on behalf of respondents No' 1to 4' tioner ADoroa h d c ourt eeki nq DT v r 2 The o as under: "...to issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned order issued by the 4th respondent imposing the punishment of Stoppage of two annual grade increments without cumulative effect vide Pr' No 'A2l 166/2017 dated 08'08'2022 on the basis of defective enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer dated 13'O7 '2021 is highly illegal arbitrary and unconstitutiona I and set aside the same with a consequential direction to the respondents to regularize the suspension period from O4'O7 '2017 to 06'10'2017 as spent on duty and release the Speclal Grade Increments' arrears aftachedtothepostwithallconsequentialbenefitsand pass..." 3 u s f n m t e r e ti to h e r b t e r 2 SN. J wp-42958 2022 The petitioner was appointed as Deputy S J'veyor in the year 2008, later promoted as Surveyor in th( year 2011. Subsequently the petitioner was deputed to D.lll J. Peddapalli and thereafter, the petitioner was ordered to work ir the office of Tahsildar-lulapalli on deputation. On 22.03.2017 ,he petitioner was directed by the Tahsildar - Julapalli to attend \vorks relating to Fixation of Boundaries of tanks under Miss on Kakatiya, demarcation of the Iand for Double Bed Roont Houses etc, Basing on the letter of the Tahsildar-Julapally, the : -d respondent placed the petitioner under suspension on ther ground that petitioner was disobedient in attending legitimai,:r duties vide order dated 04.07 .2017 . Subsequently, the respondent authorit es initiated departmental proceedings against the . petitioner, wherein the petitioner submitted his explanation to the Artir:li: of charges framed against the petitioner, by submitting his tol diaries form March 2016 to January 2017. Thereafter, on 05 10.2017 the petitioner was reinstated into service pending disci r inary action. It is further the case of the petitioner that tf( respondents have not conducted enquiry proceedings in accorl,:nce to rules and did not furnish the enquiry report and even ithout calling ^ ) J SN, J wp 42958 2022 for any explanation from the petitioner, the respondents issued Show Cause Notice dated L6.ll.2O2l proposing punishment of withholding of Two Annual Grade Increments without cumulative effbct. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 imposed the minor punishment of "Stoppage of two annual grade increments without cumulative effect" vide Pr.No.A2/166/2017 dated

08.08.2022 without considering the explanation of the petitioner.

Aggrieved by the said impugned order vide Pr.No.A2/166/2017 dated 08.08.2022 issued by the 4th respondent, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED E RECORD:- (A) The order imouoned vide Pr.No.A2l16612OL7

8.2O22 issu n ent No.4 the ounishment of withholdino of two annual orade ainst tha inaiarttarile rrlrlirro df+ari 'wl +h^rr+ petitioner is extracted hereunder. "Sub:- P.S.- S&LRs Dept-Sti A.Jeevan, Surveyor o/o Tahsildar Ramagundam Mandal Peddapalli Dist. - incidents of disobedience & indiscipline reported - disciplinary action initiated - AOC issued - explanation submitted - Enquiry proposed - EO & PO appointed - enquiry report submitted - SCN issued- explanation submitted - Punishment of withholding of (02) AGI without cumulative effect - orders - issued. tt. . :I. .-. reE 4 SN, J \\ p _42958:2022 dated:05.08.2017. Ref: 1) This office AOC Rc.No.A2/L66/2O17, datd:.27.O7.2077. 2) Explanation of Sri A. Jeeva r. Surveyor, 3) Pr.No.A2l166/2OL7, dated:06.10.2011 of the RDD 4) Lr.No.A3l01/2017, datedi22.O2.2019 r:f the EO/AD S&LR Hyderabad. S&LR Karimnagar. S&LR Ka rim naga r. 5) This offlce Rc.No.A2/166/2Ot7, dated: t l.O3.2O2l. 6) Lr. No.A3/Ol/2Ot7, dated:13.07.2O2i of the EO/AD 7) Show cause notice Rc.No. A2lt66/2077, 8) Explanation of Sri A.Jeevan, Sur,,eyor, dated: dated:06.10.2017 ofthe RDD S&LR Hyderabad. Lt.o5.2022. Whereas it was brought to the notice of -l e undersigned who is the Competent Authority alleging that S-l A.Jeevan, the then Surveyor O/o Tahsildar Ramagundam is disobedient in attending his legitimate duties, beside placincr the individual under suspension by the District Collector Pedapitl i. The disciplinary authority having given -egard to the circumstances of the case while ratifying the susp,:'nsion initiated disciplinary action against the individual vide refe r::nce I't cited. In compliance to the Article of charg : ,; issued vide reference 1'r cited the delinquent officer ,ubmitted his explanation vide reference 2nd cited which was rot convincing accordingly the Enquiry Officer was appointed viJ,: reference 3'd cited to enquiry upon the charges. ThE Enquiry of icer submitted enquiry report vides reference 4th and 6th cited i bove whereas as per enquiry report the charges of negligence v/rrre proved. Accordinolv upon communicatinq the rl rouirv reoort t officer and whi uoon the !: oroposino ounishment snaw cause notice was _ issued, The delinouent officer submitted his expla t ation while ;! r beinq not reouestinq to droD further action whit convincinq- ThC ! Se ary authoriw oDined to implement the ounishment order as p r roosed vide reference 7th cited above. Thus punishment of stoppage of two ,nnnual grade increments without cumulative effect is impost:i: upon Sri A. Jeevan, the then Surveyor O/o Tahsildar Ramagundam 5 SN, J wp 42958 2.022 subsequently the suspension period of the delinquent officer is regularized as leave period as per eligibility. Regional Deputy Director Survey and land records Hydera bad Surveyor O/o Tahsildar Ramagundam presently working at O/o Tahsildar Karimnagar Dist. (through officer To Sri A.Jeevan, the then Mandal Peddaplli Dist. Thimmapur Mandal concerned)". (B) The Charqe No.5 of Article of Charqe leveled aqainst the oetitioner and the exolanation offered bv the oetitioner alono with rema rks is extracted hereunder. Gist of Article of charge No.5 Explanation of delinquent official Remarks of the Inquiry officer Submitted tour diaries in time The contention is not correct, as reported by the DyIoS, Peddapalh in letter dt:2O.72-2O77, the delinquent not submitted diaries regularly and submitted all the diaries for (11) months March, 16 to lan 17 on 07.02.2017 to the Dylos for scrutiny. Hence, the charge is proved, Due to work load and delay in verification & counter signature by the Tahsildar concerned which was accidental, but not with any other reason. In this matter, a memo was issued to the DyIoS, Peddapalli vide ref.No.A3/1/2017 dated O7.O2.20L7 by AD,S&LRS, Peddapalli which itself substantiate submission of diaries form March,2016 to )anuary,2OL7. The tour diaries are su bmitted on 21.02.2019 at DMU Karimanaqar. 6 SN, J wp-42958 _2022 (c) Show Cause Notice dated 16.11.'.2)2L vide R.C. 166 t2fJ17 ss ed to the netitione r is extracted No.A2 hereu nder. Office of the Region: Deputy Director Survey ir rd Land Records. HyJ.:rabad. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE Rc.No.A2l 166/2r)17 Da!Ed 16.11.2O21 Sub:- P.S - & LRs Dept. Sri A. leevan, Survey.rr O/o Tahsildar Ramagundam Mandal Peddapalli District - incidents of disobedience & indiscipline reported - disciplinar) :ction initiated - AOC issued - explanation submitted - Enquiry pr,).)osed - EO & PO appointed - enquiry report submitted 0 Punishm,l rt of withholding of (02) AGI without cumulative effect - propos() 1 - explantion - called for - Regarding. Ref:- 1) 2) )) 4) s) 6) This office AOC Rc. No.A2 / 166/2017 , dat:d 27.O7.2O17. Explantion of Sri a. Jeevan, Surveyor, cE:ed 05.08.2017. This office even order, dated 06.10.2017 Lr.No.A3l01/2017, dated 22.O2.2OL9 o' he EOIAD S&LR Karimnagar. This office Rc.No.A2l166/2O17, dated : : 0.03.2021. Lr.No. A3l01/2017, dated i 13.07.2027 )f the EO/AD S&LR Ka rim naga r. @@@ The Article of charges was issued vide reerence 1=t cited against Sri A. Jeevan, Surveyor O/o. Tahsildar Ramagundarr incidents of disobedience & indiscipline reported Collectgor Peddapally. rn the charge of by the District The Delinquent officer submitted his explanti) 2nd cited which was not convincing accordingly the En appointed vide reference 3'd cited to enquiry upon 1l r vide reference luiry Officer was e charges. The 7 SN, J wp 42958 2022 Enquiry Officer submitted enquiry report vide reference 4th and 6th above cited wherein the charges were partially proved. Therefore delinquent officer i.e. Sri A. Jeevan, Surveyor O/o. Tahsildar Ramagundam is hereby show cause as to why two annual grade increments without cumulative effect should not be stoppe4d for the above charges which have been partially proved. He should submit his explanation within (15) days from the date of receipt of this show cause notice failing which the orders will be passed against him as per the material available on the merits of record as per CCA (CS) Rules, 1991. To Sd/-xxx REGIONAL DEPUry DIRECTOR SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS HYDERABAD. Sri A. Jeevan, Surveyor O/o. Tahsildar Ramagundam Mandal Peddapalli District through officer concerned. Cooy to The Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Peddapalli With a request to serve upon the individual And to transmit the served copy to this office prompfly. (D) The Interim Orders of this Court

29.11.2O22 oassed in W.P. N .42958 ot 022. which are rn force as on dat are extr cted here nder: "During the course of submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the explanation submitted to the show cause notice dated 16.L7.2O27 he further draws the attention of this Court to the para 3 in the impugned order vide Rc. No.A2l166/2017 r 8 SN, J wp 42958_2022 . dated 08.08.2022 wherein the 4th respondent ha; stated that as per the Enquiry report submitted by the Enc ( iry Officer, the charges of negligence were proved. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws the attention of the report of the Enquiry Officer rvrich states th at "never shown negligence in discharging the luties and worked to the utmost satisfaction of higher olr'icers duly following their instructions from time to time. Th 3 Tahasildar Julapalli has not submitted the facts reflectinE the actual work done in the report and if the amount is corn:ared with the four diaries the real fact will come out. Dischirr ged duties honestly and sincerely and not given any chan,.e for any allegation duties entire service of nine years" an J ultimately the conclusion of the Enquiry Officer which is; placed at Horizontal Sl.No.3 were (specific instances not furnished, Hence not Proved). Hence, this court is oF the view that the inter m proceedings No.A2/166/2017 dated 08.08.2022 stands stayed till fUr [her orders. Post the matter on 13.12.2022". DISCU ION AND CONC LUSION

5. The learned counsel aooearino on b6 half of the n mainl e followin sull miss tons: (a) Enquiry Officer had been appointed to irquire into the allegations leveled against the petitioner and had : ubmitted the report whereunder in the said report, it was clearly rbserved that 9 SN, J wp_42958-022 the Tahsildar, Julapalli had reported that during the period of deputation by Sri A. Jeevan S/o Narsaiah, in lulapalli Mandal' no survey work was pending in Julapalli Mandal' Peddapalli District vide Lr. No. A/7/2017, dated 14'09'2018 (b) Petitioner had submitted a statement along with tour diaries, but however, the second enquiry was ordered in respect of the same charges leveled against the petitioner herein vide Lr.No.A2l166 /2017, dated ir}'O3'2021 issued by Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records' Hyderabad' addressedtoTheAssistantDirector,SurveyandLandRecords, Karimnagar, on the grounds that the Enquiry Report dated 22.O2.2Otg submitted initially by the Enquiry officer/Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Karimnagar was not a conclusive report and it was not clearly established whether the charges were proved or not and consequently' a further conclusion report had been called for by the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad' (c) The subsequent Enquiry Report of the Enquiry Officer and Assistant Director (FAC), Survey and Land Records' Peddapalli, vide Lr.No.A3/Ol/2017 dated 13'07'2021 in response to the Lr.No.A2l166 /2017, dated 1O'03'2021 was again l0 X SN, J \\p -_42958 -.2022 furnished by the Assistant Director (FAC), Sur,rey and Land Records, Peddapalli to the Regional Deputy Direct,rr, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad. (d) The petitioner was issued Show cau ;e notice vide Rc.No.A2l166/2017 dated L6.ll.2O2l by the re lpondent No.4 herein and the said Show Cause notice itself incli::ated that the disciplinary authority opined to implement he proposed punishment of withholding of Two Annual Gri),:le increments without cumulative effect, without considering th€ specific pleas put forth in the detailed explanation dated 10.05,:1022 furnished by the petitioner to the Respondent No.4 herein n response to the show cause notice dated 16.11.2021 issued to :he petitioner, the order impugned vide Pr.No.A2/166/2017, da:cd 08.08.2022 had been issued to the petitioner mechan,:ally without application of mind and without assigning any rea:r,)ns. (e) The conclusive report submitted b1 the Enquiry Officer dated 13.07.2021 is contrary to the fi rdings in the Enquiry Report dated 21.02.2019 of the Enquiry C,ll'icer/Assistant Director, S & LR, Karimnagar. l*-.ry ,/ SN, J w 42958 2022 (f) The Enquiry report dated 21.02.20L9 contained clear observations in favour of the petitioner, stating that during the period of deputation of petitioner in Julapalli Mandal, there was no survey related work pending in Julapalli Mandal (S) Upon the instructions issued as per the letter dated 70.03.2021, the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad directed submission of a clea r-conclusive report upon the charges leveled against the petitioner herein, by the Assistant Director S&LR, Karminagar. (h) Accordingly, vide Lr.No.A3/Ot/20L7 dated

73.07.2027, Assistant Director (FAC), Survey and Land Records, Peddapalli had furnished the enquiry report and the same indicated that though all the charges leveled against the petitioner were not proved but, one charge against the petitioner was held proved. (i) Based on the said alleged report, the order impugned vide Pr.No.A2/t66/20t7, dated 09.08.2022 had been passed mechanically without considering all the pleas put forth by the petitioner in the detailed explanation furnished by the petitioner vide letter dated 10.05.2022 which was submitted in 12 SN, J \\p 429582022 response to Show Cause notice dated 16.11.2i).11 issued to the petitioner herein. (j) The said order impugned vide pr,t)o.AZ/t66/20t7, dated 08.08.2022 is contrary to the findings e rrived at in the Enquiry Report submitted by the Assistant Dircrr tor, Survey and Land records, Karimnagar and therefore, the :>rder impugned needs to be set aside.

6. Th As istant v ENt PI a on behalf of the resoondents on the othr:r hand mainlv Duts fort the followinq su mrssrons: (a) The detailed procedure as contemll ated under the relevant rules had been followed and there is nr::her violation of the procedure contemplated nor violation of -r::lsy661 rules in force. (b) The order impugned is justified, r::asonable and warrants no interference by this Court. (c) Though the petitioner has a remedy lc prefer appeal before the appellate authority as provided und:- the rules, the petitioner failed to avail alternative remedy arrd instead, the petitioner approached this Court by filing t I ) present writ petition. 13 SN, J wp-42958 _2022 (d) The present writ petition needs to be dismissed. 7. A bare perusal of the Enquiry Report submitted on L3.07.202I, indicates that except for one charge leveled against the petitioner, all the charges had been held as ,,not proved,,. The charge proved against the petitioner pertains to Charge No.5 of Article of charges i.e, petitioner had submitted tour diaries in time (referred to and extracted above).

8. A bare perusal of the record clearly indicates that the Enquiry report, dated 2L.02.20i-9 of the EO/AD S & LR Karimanagar, had clear findings that there was no lapse in discharge of duties by the petitioner and during the period of deputation by the petitioner in Julapalli Mandal, no survey related work had been pending in Julapalli Mandal, peddappalli District. But, however, in pursuance to the letter dated 10.03.2021 issued by the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad, another report had been furnished vide Lr.No.A3 /OI/2017 dated 13.07.2021 to the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad from the Assistant Director(FAC), Survey & Land Records, peddapalli indicating that one charge leveled against the petitioner was held fE t4 SN, J wp 42958 2022 proved and the rest of the charges leveled agair!t the petitioner was held not proved, but however, on the b,l;is of the said Enquiry Report furnished vide Lr.No.A3lt) -/2017 dated

13.07.2027 from the Assistant Director (FAC), :iurvey & Land Records, Peddpalli to the Regional Deputy Dire(lor, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad, the order lrtpugned vide Pr.No.A2l166/2017, dated 08.08.2022 had been 1 assed. 9, A bare perusal of the order irnpugned vide Pr.No.A2l16612017, dated O8.O8.2022 (re.''erred to and extracted above) clearly indicates that the same had been passed without proper application of mind and without assigning reasons in a routine m.rnner without considering the detailed pleas as put 'brth by the petitioner vide petitioner's detailed explt nation dated LO.O5.2O22 furnished by the petitioner in response to the Show Cause notice dated L6.LL.2O2! I sued to the petitioner herein.

10. This Court opines that the order irr pugned dated 08.08.2022 issued by the respondent No.4 is :ontrary to the report of the Enquiry Officer i.e. Assistant Dire(:l or, Survey and Land Records, Karimnagar dated 21.02.2019 anc the findings in 15 SN, J wp 42958_2022 favour of the petitioner thereunder which clearly indicates that petitioner had never shown any negligence in discharging petitioner's duties and petitioner had worked to the utmost satisfaction of higher officers duly following their instructions from time to time and further that petitioner had not been given any chance for any allegations in discharge of petitioner's duties in petitioner's entire service of nine years.

11. This Court opines that in view of the fact that the Article of Charges framed against the petitioner vide proceedings dated 26.07.2OL7 clearly indicated that the departmenta! proceedings had been initaated against the petitioner under Rule 2O of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rules 1991, the procedure as prescribed and laid down under Rule 2O APCS (CCA) Rules 1991, has to be neceisarily foltowed. Admittedly, as borne on record, the said procedure had not been foltowed and no regular enquiry had been conducted and based on the explanation furnished by the petitioner, the order impugned had been passed unilaterally contrary to the due procedure as contemplated under CCA (CS) Rutes, 1991. Hence, this Court opines that the petitioner is ( I 1 l t6 SN, J wp 42958 2022 entitled for the relief as prayed for in th,t: present writ petition. L2. Takino into nsideratio n: (a) The aforesaid facts and circunrstances of the case, (b) The submissions made by the k arned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner arr I the tearned Assistant Government Pleader appearing olr behatf of the respondents, (c) The impugned order vide pr.No A2/L66/2OL7 dated 08.08.2O22 issued by the 4th resporr lent imposing the punishment of withholding of two ,annual grade increments without cumulative effect against the petitioner (referred to and extracted above) (d) The explanation offered by the petitaoner against Charge No.5 of Article of Charges (r::ferred to and extracted above), (e) The contents of the report datr: I 22.O2.ZOL9. vide Lr.NoA3/OL/2OL7 of the EO/AD S&LIt. Karimnagar, which is in favour of the petitioner herein, t7 sN. .l wP,42958_2022 (f) The contents of the letter dated 10.03.2021 issued by the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad addressed to the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Karimnagar, (S) The contents of the conclusive Enquiry Report furnished by the Assistant Director (FAC), Survey and Land Records, Peddapalli addressed to the Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Hyderabad vide Lr.No.ASlOLlzOt7 dated 13.O7.2O2L in response to the letter dated 10.03.2O2L addtessed to the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Karimnagar, (h) The Show Cause notice Rc.No.A2,/15612OL7, dated L6.LL.2O2L issued to the petitioner, (i) Detailed explanation furnished by the petitioner dated 1O.O5.2022 in response to the Show Cause notice dated 16.11.2021 issued to the petitioner. (j) Initiating the departmental proceedings under Rule 2O of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rutes, without following the due procedure contemplated under the said Rule. l8 SN, J lvp 42958_2022 (j) The discussion and conclusion as arrived at para Nos.5 to 12 in the present order, The writ petition is allowed. The or,ler impugned yr-de Pr.No.A2/L66/2OL7, dated O8,O8.2O22 rissued to the petitioner by the 4th respondent is set erliide and the respondents are directed to consider the rr quest of the petitioner to regularize the suspension period from O4.O7.2OL7 to 16.1O.2O17 as spent on dut! and also to consider the request of the petitioner frl r release of special grade increments, with al! consequ(!rrtial benefits within a period of four (4) weeks from the rlilte of receipt of a copy of the order in accordance to law, duly reconsidering petitioner's explanation datec 1O.O5.2022 furnished by the petitioner in response to thc show cause notice dated 16.11.2O21 issued to the petitaorrer herein, in conformity with principles of natura! justice, by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the I) )titioner and duly communicate the decision on the subjer::: issue to the petitioner herein. However, there shall be nr) order as to costs, l9 SN, J wP _429s8 _2022 Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department' Secretariat Buildings' The ' 2. The Commissioner of Survey Settlements And Land Records' Telangana' State of T6langana, HYderabad' Hyderabad.

3. The District Collector (S and LRS), Karimnagar' Karimnagar District' 4. Reqional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records' Survey Bhavan' Naiayangudi, HYderabad.

5. One CC to Sri Nayakawadi Ramesh' Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Services I' High Court forthe State of Telangana' at Hyderabad [OUTI

7. Two CD CoPies T J /BSK HIGH COURT DATED:2610912025 CC TODAY \ Et4 o( s s \ --) o Er- t ORDER WP.No.42958 of 2022 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS