High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamusdeclaringtheactionoftherespondentshereinindismissingthe petitioner from services vidq G.Ort.No.183 dated 17-1O-2O17 and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, opposed to the established principles of law,violationofprinciplesofnaturaljustice,contrarytoCCARulesandviolation of Art.14 and 16 of the constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate me into services by duly treating my suspension period and the period from the date of dismissal from service i.e., 17 -10-20,1 7 to the .'on duty.,and grant all consequential and monetary date of my reinstatement aS benefits" Prayer is amended as per C.O dt. O4tOgt2O23 in lA O1t2022. lA NO: 3 OF 2o22 Petition under section i 5'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased suspend G.o-Rt No 183 Dt 1il1ot20't 7 and reinstate me into services by taking into consideration one Sri. Aijaz A[ who was arso simirarry praced and was reinstated into services by the respondents vide proceedings:- 546g/vigr2o1o, dt.23-06-2015 on the ground that there are no financiar ross to the pubric exchequer and arso taking into consideration of the report submitted by the 3, respond ent vid e her proceed ings Lr. No. A 1 i.l 43l 20 1 3, dt.2Z_O 1 _2022. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 48667 0F 20171 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 preased to suspend the impugned order vide G.o.Rt.No. 183 dated 1r-10-2017 reinstating the petitioner into services pending disposar of the present petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms.G.MADHURI Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES llt & V The Court made the following: ORDER -t 1 wp_39211 20ll N8K, I _{ THE HON , BLE SRI JUSTTCE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRTT PETITTON No.3 9237 of20l7 ORDER: The case at hand, insofar as relevant for the purpose of this writ petition, is that petitioner was a Junior Assistant in the Department of Women & Child Welfare, and he was suspended from service on the atlegation of misappropriation of funds, stating that during 2006 to 2008 when the petitioner was in ICDS Project, Boath' the petitioner did not properly maintain the Records and Counterfbits of Cheque Books which led to non-disbursal of amounts to Anganwadi workers & Helpers, thereby teading to misappropriation. The misappropriated amounts are said to be around Rs.5,76,609/- (due to non-disbursal of Honorarium)' Rs' 1 '61'703l- (due to non-disbursal of TA & DA), and Rs' 1,13,7501 (due to non-payment of house rents to Anganwadi Centres) by the then CDPOs namely Smt' Chinnamma, and Smt.Rajeswaramma (who are now retired from service)' 1.1 The petitioner submitted explanation' and also stated in the subsequent enquiry proceedings that he does not have sufficient knowledge aboutmaintenanceofGovemmentAccountsandthathefailedtomaintain the records properly as he could not pass Accounts Test and was posted in theProject,andthepetitionercannotbeliabtefbrdisbursal/non-disbursalof amounts by the then CDPOF, and that there is no scope for the petitioner to misappropriate the Govemment funds since he is only a Junior Assistant who is supposed to maintain accounts' It was further stated that Smt' Rajeswaramma took all the accounts books like U'D' pay' Cash book' TBR' Contingent bilt Register etc.' into her control and maintained them in her own,lrandwriting which can be verified by checking the account books \:_i r. I \.] 2 wp 39237 2O7t NOK, J - ,\. thoroughly, but the enquiry officer without considering the explanation made the petitioner liable for mlsappropnatlon; and the respondent authorities have dismissed the petitioner from service by the impugned G.O.Rt.No. 183 dated 17.tO.2Ol7. 2. Heard Ms. G. Madhuri, leamed counsel for the petitioner; and learned Govemment pleaders for Services-Ill, and Services-v. perused the record. 3' A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by 2nd respondent-Director Women Development & Child Welfare, at paragraphs 10, ll, 12 and 13 would show that the charges against Smt. N. Chinnamma, CDpO (retired), Smt. V Rajeswaramma, CDpO (retired) were proved, and based on the tindings of the enquiry officer, a Show Cause notice dated 16.02.2017. and atier considering their explanation to the Show (,ause notice, the Government has imposed the punishmen t of r,yocut in their pension for ten years, in addition to recovery of amounts. lt is further stated that in the case of the petitioner, he was dismiSsed from service aparl fiom ordering recovery of amount of Rs.5,66,455/_ vide the impugned Order. It is stated that due process of raw and principles of natural justice has been fo,owed while imposing the punishment.

3.1 The additional counter affidavit filed by the respondents is also on similar lines as that of the counter affidavit. It is also stated in the additional counter, at paragraph 15, that ,,sri syed Javeecl, Junior Assistant ha.s submitted his deposit\on on 17.12.2()t4 that, he agreed that there were somefinancial irregularities during his tenure. Further he intimated that he has been ready to obey the orders of the higher authorities on the irregularities committed by him.,, BLJ ) wp 39237 -2011 NBK, ]

3.2 It is further stated in the additional counter affidavit' at paragraph No.20, as follows: "20. In reply to Para No'32 to 34, it is to submit that' the applicant has also submitted his appeal to Government on iti.Ol.ZOZt wherein petitioner has also submitted the representation Dt. l0-li)-2020 along ve ith Bank Statements of 6OO Account of ICDS Project, Boath for the period /rom 01.01.2006 to j 1.12.2008 after the punishment imposed b him' This ffice has issued instructions to RJD' Warangal to cross check'ihe bank statement with bank officials and ffice record available at ICDS Boath' In turn the RJD' Warangal has instructed the DWO, Adilabatt to verfu the Bank statement with the record. The DWO, Adilabad has submitted that' on ve:rification of the DDO Account of ICDS Project' Boarh' it is notlced that,Ln amount o/Rs 5,25,979/- balance is available as on 31.12.2005. Out of which an amount of Rs'4'32'868/- has bteen disbursed on 03.01.2009 & 05'01'2009' then the available balon"" as on 05.01.2009 is Rs93,lll/- only' But the ironrrrtions of 0 j.0 t.2009 & 05'01'2009 were not shown in the i.i. p"y, which is not clear that, said amount is related to said tronro"ii.o, only. However, the appeal is also under process at Government for further orders ' "

4. Having considered the respective submissions and perused the record' it may be noted that the Memo dated 24'09'2021' at material page No'20 of I.A.No.3 of 2ll2,would show that the petitioner has filed a representation dated l0.l0.2020 wherein it is stated by the petitioner that "the misappropriation amount which is ordered for recovery earlier\ is already available in DDO Accounr during said tenure and not misused'

4.1 Furthermore, in response to the Memo dated 24'09'2021' the Regional Joint Director, issued a Memo dated 21'01'2022 stating as follows: "Further, the DWO, WCD & SC, A amount of Rs.5,25,979 (RuPees dilabad, is informed that an Five Lakhs TwentY Five 4 wp_39231-2017 NBK, J Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Nine Onlyl is shown as balance on 31.12.2008 ;n the bantk'staiel*Jr'rr'itrr, * ,n" reporr as 3t.t2.2005 instgad of 3t.t2.2008) oii lnn balance available as on 05.0 t.2009 a"Oiting"ii.ilir"',, as shown the bank statement is Rs'e3,ut/_ RZi;;;;;;;,e .rhree "yt"i T h t u.s tt n d O n e h u n d re el a n d E l ev e n, r' i l.' " i)i, t,," rri,, r iL ri o.f payments / disbursemenu i; ,h;,i;h' ;;;""';i not been specifietl in the said report

5. A perusal of the averments in the counter affidavit, and additional counrer affidavit would show that the Regional Joint Director addressed a lener dated 22'0r'2022 vide Letrer No.N143/20r3, stating rhat there is a balance of Rs.5,25,979 as on 31.12.200g in DDO Account No.000000520 lTgggl5l of ICDS project Boarh; and rhar an amounr of Rs.4,32.868/- has been disbursed by the then CD.O, ICDS project Boath during the working period of Sri Syed Javeed, former Junior Assistant o/o CDPO, ICDS project Boath; and that the available balance as on 05.01.2009 is Rs.93.l I l/-.

6. At this juncrure, it may be noted that the allegation against the petirioner is thar he did not maintain the Records and counterfoils of Cheque Books, during 2006 to 200g, which led to non_disbursal of amounts to Anganwadi Workers & Helpers, thereby leading to misappropriation of Rs.5,76,609/- (due to non_di5fu15sl of Honorarium), Rs. 1,61,703l- (clue to non-disbursal of TA & DA),,and Rs. I , 13,7 s}/_(due to non_payment of house rents to Anganwadi Centres) by the then CDpOs namely Smt. Chinnamma, and Smt. Rajeswaramma.

7. In this connection 22.0t.2022 addressed by Commissioner, \!bmen it is relevant to note that as per the letter dated the 3.d respondent_Regional Joint Director to the & Child Welfare Department, an amount of --7 5 wp 19231'2011 NBK, J Rs.5,25,979 was available in the DDO Account as on 31.12'2008' and that an amount of Rs.4,32,86E/- has been disbursed by the then CDPOs' and a report has been called for vide T'O'Memo No 'A|Z3OI2OO9 dated2l 'Ol '2022' from DWO, WCD & SC, Aditabad to cross check the drawl of amounts and payments i.e., honorarium & T'A' D'A' of Anganwadi Teachers & Helpers and Rents ofAnganwadi Centres relating to the certain period by calling the inlormation from CDPO, ICDS Project Boath' 8. A perusal of letter dated22'01'2022 addressed by the Regional Joint Director reveals that the District Welfare Officer (DWO) has been asked to cross check the drawl and payments of amounts relating honorarium & T'A' D.A. of Anganwadi Teachers & Helpers and Rents of Anganwadi Centres relating to the certain period by calling the information from CDPO' ICDS Project Boath' Further, it is the specific case of the petitioner that one Lizaz Ali, a similarly ptaced former Senior Assistant' ICDS Project' Mahaboobabad, was exonerated of the charges vide Proceedings dated 21.04.2015 and was reinstated into service' in addition to treating his suspension period as "on duty"; whereas the respondent authorities have dismissed the petitioner from service when it is proved from the bank statement that DDO Account has a balance of Rs'5'25'979 as on 31' 12'2008 and there is no niisappropriation proved against the petitioner' [n view of the factual aspects that have come to light' with regard to 9. theexistenceofbalanceamountofRs'5'25'gTgintheDDOAccountason 31.12.2008, and also the lltter dated22'01 2022 addressed by the Regional Joint Director, directing the District Welfare Officer to cross check the payment of Honorarium and TA/DA to Anganwadi workers and also rents to Anganwadi centres, this Court is of the considered view that the very disrnissal of the petitioner by the impugned Order dated 17'10'2017 is 6 wp 39231 20tl NB(, J r arbitrary and wilhout proper verification before passing of the impugned Orders. In that view of the matter, the impugned Order dated 17.10.2017 is liable to be set aside. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, bv setting aside the impugned Order dated l7.lO.2Ol7. No costs. The respondent_authorities shalt forthr'r'ith reinstate the petitioner into service, with similar treatment on par with simirarl-v situated person Aizal Ali, a former Senior Assistant. However, considering that the information sought for by the 3.d respondent_ Regional Joinr Direcror vide letter d,ated.22.0r.2022 is yet to be fumished by the 4th respondent-District werfare officer after necessary cross verification or drawl an. disbursements of amounts during relevant period, this order does not preclude the 3.d respondent from taking appropriate action as per the Rules applicable, based on the outcome of cross verification. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/-A. SRINIVAS A REDDY TANT RE GISTRAR $ SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 J 4 5

8. \* I3llffi s'f.i]3331313.v;,1g3[??:yj1",?ffi The Director, Women Devel Telangana, uvo"i"6ro"""lopment and child welfare Department, state of 1!;!dchidwe,f are 5:;*",-lq5+:l;ll?113jr":,,. wo men Deveropment a nd ch i rd we rra re r!i,31'3it"j"ff 'ti!?:#E:. Depa rtm ent ro r women, ch ird re n, Disa b red a nd One CC to Ms.G.MADHURI, Advocate. tOpUCl ff,ir""t to GP FoR sERVtcEs ilt, High court for the state of Tetangana. to GP FoR sERvlcES V, Hish court for the stare of retansana. U,?r?tt Two CD Copies. SK HIGH COURT DATED:1310812025 i llE ST4 14: ( I 2 5 IIJE 2025 (:- \ ORDER ^.. WP.No.39237 of 2017 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1