HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.20150 OF 2014
DATED: 18.07.2014 Between:
E.Gurunadh … Petitioner And The District Judge, Visakhapatnam and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.20150 of 2014
JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This writ petition has been filed challenging the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the first respondent on the point that enquiry conducted by the second respondent is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Bereft of all unnecessary details, we find that the real challenge is to the procedure followed by the enquiry officer urging the same is not in consonance with sub-rule 12(a) of Rule 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 and Rule 14 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the procedure adopted by the enquiry officer while taking evidence, is not in accordance with the above rules.
Admitted position is that hearing of the enquiry is yet to be concluded. It is at the arguments stage.
We are therefore of the view that it is absolutely at premature stage. After hearing the arguments, it may so happen that the enquiry officer will submit a report considering the explanation of the writ petitioner. It cannot be presumed that the enquiry officer is passing adverse findings. With this assumption, the Writ Petition has been presented. It is appropriate to note that enquiry proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by the first respondent in his order, dated 25.01.2014.
It is well settled that if any illegality is resorted to by the enquiry officer or by the disciplinary authority, that can be taken care of at a later stage by appropriate authority. We therefore dismiss the Writ Petition holding it as premature. We keep all points open to agitate before appropriate forum, if so advised. No order as to costs.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed.
18th JULY, 2014.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J kvni