R.V.S.N.V.P.Sarma, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.19860 of 2016 ORDER:

The petitioner claims to have been appointed as a non-technical maistry in the third respondent temple. The said post was converted as Junior Assistant and he was posted in the Accounts Section. He was entrusted with the reconciliation of cash transaction of the temple with Vysya Bank and other banks. Later on he was entrusted with the job of cashier. He admits that he was unable to remit the temple collections regularly in the banks. However, when the temple accounts from April 2002 to 21.03.2003 were verified, it was noticed that the petitioner did not remit the amount of Rs.4,85,388.50 in the banks. He states that he repaid the amounts on 24th and 25th March, 2003. A charge sheet was issued to him on 25.03.2003 with regard to the late remittance of the said amount, and the petitioner submitted his explanation on 14.04.2003.

Another additional charge sheet was issued on 22.10.2003, to which also the petitioner submitted his explanation on 03.11.2003. An enquiry officer was appointed and he submitted his report after considering the explanation of the petitioner. The Special Officer of the temple issued proceedings on 17.06.2004 asking the petitioner to explain with regard to the proposed punishment. In the said proceedings, the petitioner was reinstated as non-technical maistry, which was his initial post. He reported for duty and submitted his explanation to the show cause notice on 27.10.2004. Thereafter, an audit was conducted and it was noticed that there were several lapses in the working of the petitioner and eight charges were framed while keeping the petitioner under suspension. A criminal case was also filed in C.C.No.

223 of 2007 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Mobile), Eluru, which ended in acquittal on 19.06.2009. The petitioner states that he filed an appeal on 19.03.2005 to the second respondent against the order of suspension and when the same was not disposed of, he filed W.P.No.13613 of 2005, challenging the order of suspension dated 26.02.2005. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on 27.06.2005 directing the second respondent to pass appropriate orders on the stay petition expeditiously within a period of four weeks.

order was communicated, the second respondent did not pass any orders nor is any subsistence allowance being paid till today. Now, the present Writ Petition is filed after eleven years challenging the inaction of the second respondent in disposing of the appeal in spite of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.13613 of 2005. He explains the laches by placing reliance on several representations made from the year 2009 to 2016. Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of oral instructions, submits that though the petitioner was offered subsistence allowance, the same was not received by him and he did not cooperate with the enquiry. In those circumstances only, enquiry was not completed till today.

In view of the above fact situation, this Court feels that the Writ Petition need not be kept pending, and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this Court disposes of this Writ Petition with the following order: i) The petitioner shall cooperate with the enquiry pursuant to the charges framed against him on 26.02.2005 and respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall complete the enquiry as expeditiously as possible, but not later than six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

ii) Respondent No.3 shall pay the subsistence allowance due to the petitioner from today, and with regard to the past subsistence allowance, the enquiry officer shall pass appropriate orders while submitting the report. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petition in the manner, as above, the appeal before the second respondent becomes infructuous. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of at the admission stage. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________________

(A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J) 22.06.2016 vs