AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T. Amarnath Goud, J
Heard Mr. A. K. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also heard Mr. D. Sarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents.
The present petition has been filed under Article-226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus as to why the departmental proceeding dated 16th May, 2023 shall not be set aside along with inquiry report dated 02.08.2023 and also for quashing the preliminary punishment order of dismissal from service of the petitioner dated 19.10.2023.
The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
“i. Admit the writ petition of the petitioner.
ii. Issue notice upon the respondents.
iii. Call for the relevant records from the custody of the respondents.
AND
iv. After hearing the parties, Your Lordship would be kind enough to set aside/quash/cancel the departmental proceeding vide memorandum No.F.41/TSR/-V (IR-I) DP/2022/2125-27 dated 16th May, 2023.
v. Your Lordship would be kind enough to set aside/quashed/cancel the inquiry report dated 02.08.2023 and proposed punishment order of dismissal of service dated 19.10.2023 of the petitioner for fair ends of justice.
vii. And stay the operation of proposed punishment order of dismissal of service dated 19.10.2023 of the petitioner till completion of the writ petition for fair ends of justice.”
The facts in brief are that the petitioner is an employee of Barber (Enrolled Follower) under the respondent No.5 and the respondent No.5 without giving any intimation to the petitioner suddenly initiated a departmental proceeding against the petitioner vide memorandum dated 16.05.2023 and subsequently, the disciplinary authority issued proposed major punishment order dated 19.10.2023 and this order has been challenged by the petitioner in the present petition which is only a memorandum asking for explanation/representation from the petitioner to be submitted. During the course of argument, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the said memorandum they have submitted explanation/representation and the same is pending and in any moment the petitioner would be terminated from service.
Hence, the present petitioner has been preferred by the petitioner before this Court for redress.
In view of the above, the present writ petition stand dismissed as premature. In the event, if the representation/explanation of the petitioner made to the memorandum and if the same is pending, it is open for the respondents to consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.