AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Challa Gunaranjan, J
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“to declare the action of the respondents especially the 1st respondent in not passing orders on my appeal and the action of the respondents 4 to 6 in not granting retiral benefits including the pension having permitted the petitioner to retire on attaining the age of superannuation and not considering the explanations and representations including the representations dated 30.04.2024, 01.07.2024 and 05.02.2025 for grant of retrial benefits and the pension as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of well-settled principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on petitioners representations on sympathetic grounds considering the petitioners' unblemished service and contribution to literacy world and the petitioners present health and financial condition and to pass such other orders.”
(a) Petitioner while working as Principal of Government Degree College, Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District, was alleged to have committed certain irregularities and misappropriated the UGC funds for his personal benefit. Enquiry came to be initiated against the petitioner and based on enquiry report dated 01.09.2011 submitted by Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Guntur, petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation and as the report suggested petitioner misappropriated an amount of Rs.26,74,167/-, he was placed under suspension by proceedings dated 28.12.2011. Later on, he came to be reinstated into service by proceedings dated 25.06.2013. With reference to the enquiry report, petitioner was issued charge memo with articles of charge by proceedings dated 18.12.2014. Joint Director, who conducted enquiry in pursuance to the aforesaid charges submitted enquiry report concluding that petitioner has used UGC funds for his personal benefit and later on, he was asked to deposit back the said amount. Petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.17,00,000/- on 14.11.2018.
(b) Meanwhile, based on the enquiry report, the Commissioner of Collegiate Education, has proposed to impose major penalty in terms of Rule 9(x) of APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991 of dismissal from service besides recovery of balance amount of Rs.16,80,886/-with interest. Government vide G.O.Ms.No.21, Higher Education (VC) Department, dated 24.04.2017 permitted the competent authority to impose major penalty of dismissal from service besides recovery of the amount as recommended by Commissioner of Collegiate Education.
(c) Meanwhile, petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2017. Nearly after 6½ years, the 4th respondent by proceedings Rc.No.775/Ser.I-A/OP.I/2011, dated 15.04.2024, issued show-cause notice to the petitioner calling for explanation as to why penalty of withholding of hundred percent pension and gratuity permanently cannot be imposed under Rule 20 of APCS (CC&A) Rules, 1991, besides recovery of misappropriate of amount.
(d) Though the Government by G.O.Ms.No.21, dated 24.04.2017 permitted the competent authority to impose major penalty of dismissal from service and recovery of the amount, the competent authority beyond the same also proposed to withhold hundred percent pension and gratuity. Petitioner submitted explanation on 30.04.2024 inter alia stating that due to his ill health and dire necessity, the amount was drawn from the UGC fund and later, he has paid Rs.17,00,000/- on 14.11.2018, without considering the same, the entire amount is sought to be recovered. Petitioner also raised certain other pleas justifying his action. The 4th respondent has not passed any orders thereafter and the matter is pending consideration. Petitioner subsequently made further representations expressing his willingness to pay the balance amount if any pending, however, there is no response to the same as well.
(e) Since the respondents are not proceeding further and deciding the objections filed by the petitioner, the present writ petition came to be instituted.
Heard M/s.Leo Law Associates LLP for the petitioner and Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services – II for the respondents.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record written instructions dated 17.03.2025. As per the written instructions, it is stated that pension and other retiral benefits of delinquent officer are not being released due to pendency of disciplinary proceedings and further that the petitioner has paid only principal amount and an amount of Rs.10,19,080/- is payable towards interest.
Even as per the aforesaid written instructions, it is stated that the disciplinary proceedings are yet to be finalised. A perusal of record discloses that though 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.21, dated 24.04.2017, permitting the competent authority to impose major penalty of dismissal from service besides recovery of balance amount of Rs.16,80,886/- with interest in terms of Rule 9(x) of APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991, the 4th respondent issued show-cause notice nearly after 6½ years proposing to impose major penalty of withholding of hundred percent pension and gratuity besides recovery of amount, to which petitioner has submitted explanation and the same has not been decided so far. Since the grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not deciding the matter upon considering his explanation to the show-cause notice, this Court is of the opinion that it would suffice to direct the 4th respondent to consider the explanation submitted by petitioner in pursuance to the show-cause notice dated 15.04.2024 by fixing some time frame.
At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an opportunity may also be given to the petitioner in case if he intends to file any further objections or explanation to the show-cause notice dated 15.04.2024.
Having considered the submissions made by both parties, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file his further objections or explanation, if any, to the show-cause notice dated 15.04.2024 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and also the 4th respondent is directed to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass speaking orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed.