M.Srinivas Shanker v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.25489 OF 2018 Dated:25.07.2018 Between:

M. Srinivas Shanker, S/o. Late M. Kondaiah, Aged 36years, R/o.5-9-560, Gunfoundry, Abids, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Revenue (Services-II) Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad, rep., by its Special Chief Secretary and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.25489 OF 2018 ORDER:

Heard.

2.

Petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds. Subsequently, he was promoted as Deputy Tahsildar. In this Writ Petition, petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension and initiation of disciplinary proceedings against him.

3.

Though learned senior counsel contends that the District Collector is not competent to place the petitioner under suspension and also not competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings, a reading of Rules 8, 9, 11 and 13 of the Telangana State Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules would make it clear that the District Collector is competent to place the Mandal Revenue Officer/Tahsildar under suspension. However, such suspension can only be for a maximum period of three months and he should obtain approval of the Commissioner, if suspension period has to be extended beyond the period of three months. Further, the District Collector is also competent to impose minor punishment. Thus, it cannot be said that the District Collector is not competent to suspend and initiate disciplinary proceedings. 4.

At this stage, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that only allegation against petitioner is absence from duty and it does not require much time to complete enquiry against the petitioner.

5.

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submits that the department requires six months time to complete the enquiry against the petitioner.

6.

As the allegation levelled against the petitioner is absence from duty, it cannot be said that elaborate enquiry needed to be conducted requiring such a long time. Therefore, seeking time of six months to complete enquiry, in the facts of this case, is unreasonable.

7.

Having regard to the respective submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that the District Collector, Vikarabad, to ensure that the enquiry is completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions shall stand closed.

____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date:25.07.2018 KH