Union Of India Rept. By Its Secretary Ministry To The v. R. Guruswamy S/O. R. Rajaiah

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.29488 2017 Date:31.8.2017 Between:

Union of India, reptd by its Secretary, Ministry to the Government of India, Ministry of Communications & IT Department of Posts, New Delhi and three others.

..... Petitioners And:

K.Guruswamy, S/o R.Rajaiah and another.

.....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Mr. K.Lakshman Assistant Solicitor General The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & GSP, J WP.No.29488 of 2017 Dated:31.8.2017 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) This Writ Petition is filed by the Union of India and three others against order, dated 25.01.2016, in Original Application No.231 of 2015 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal').

Respondent No.1, who was Post Master (Grade-I), filed the afore-mentioned O.A. questioning the charge memo, dated 19.6.2013, served on him after his retirement. The Tribunal by the afore-mentioned order, while dismissing the said O.A., directed the petitioners to complete the disciplinary proceedings, which was initiated by them as far back as 19.6.2013, within six weeks. More than 1 1⁄2 years later, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition questioning the stipulation of time for completion of the disciplinary proceedings.

In our opinion, if the petitioners were not satisfied with the time stipulated for completion of enquiry, they could have sought review of the order or at least sought extension of time. A vague plea is raised in the affidavit, filed in support of this Writ Petition, that a Miscellaneous Application filed for extension of time appears to have been dismissed by the Tribunal. Even if that be so, dismissal of such application would

CVNR, J & GSP, J WP.No.29488 of 2017 Dated:31.8.2017 not give rise to filing of the present Writ Petition questioning the stipulation of time itself. If the petitioners were aggrieved by the dismissal of the application filed for extension of time, they could have availed appropriate legal remedy questioning the said order.

For the afore-mentioned reasons and subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.36688 of 2017 is dismissed as infructuous. __________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY _____________________________ JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD 31st August 2017 DR