Narsimhulu v. State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.25223 OF 2018

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "....to issue a Writ, Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 2nd respondent imposing punishment of withholding of 2 increments without cumulative effect to the petitioner vide Progs.No.A3/12/2016-1, dated 06.09.2017 as ultra vires, illegal, without jurisdiction, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same with all consequential benefits including salary for the suspension period promotion etc., and pass such and further orders in the interest of justice.

Heard Sri S.Rahul Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is working as Panchayat Secretary Grade-I. While so, the 2nd respondentDistrict Collector had initiated disciplinary proceedings against him and imposed the punishment of withholding of two annual increments without cumulative effect vide proceedings dated 6-9-2017.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the disciplinary authority for Panchayat Secretary is the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment whereas, the 2nd respondent, who is the incompetent authority has imposed the punishment; that in support of his contention, learned counsel placed reliance on the Division

Bench judgment of this Court in W.A.No.1418 of 2018, dated 23.10.2018, wherein it was observed that for Panchayat Secretary, the disciplinary authority is the Commissioner, but not the District Collector; and that the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the impugned order be set aside and liberty be given to the competent authority to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Having considered the said submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 6.9.2017 passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside. However, liberty is given to the competent authority to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner, if they are so advised. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 3rd April, 2019 rkk