J.Sundar Ramaiah, v. The State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.9215 OF 2017 DATED : 03.04.2017 Between :

J.Sundar Ramaiah s/o.Suryanarayana, Aged about 65 yrs, Occu : Retired as Assistant City Planner/ Asst.Director of Town and Country Planning, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, R/o.H.No.12-2-417/B/53, Flat No.401, Sri Sai Residency, LIC Colony, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad.

..

Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.

.. Respondents This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.9215 of 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioner retired from service as Assistant City Planner/Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2009. Alleging that during the period from 02.04.2007 to 26.02.2009 when he was working as Town Planning Officer, in Malkajgiri Municipality, he was indulged in illegal activities, a charge memo was drawn and served on him vide G.O.Rt.No.699 dated 13.06.2011. Petitioner filed his explanation on 18.07.2011 denying the allegations. Alleging inaction on the part of the respondent-authorities in concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated on 13.06.2011, this writ petition is filed.

3.

When the matter is taken up, learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that there is no progress in the enquiry after the charge memo was served on the petitioner. No reasons are forthcoming for such inordinate delay in concluding the disciplinary proceedings, more so, when a person retired from service in the year 2009 and even after seven years, there is no progress. Such conduct on the part of the respondents is highly deprecated. It is expected that the Government shall streamline in conducting the disciplinary proceedings by fixing a fixed time frame.

- 3 - 4.

Having regard to the peculiar facts of this case, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader, fairly submits that reasonable time may be fixed for finalising the disciplinary action 5.

Having regard to these submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If disciplinary proceedings are not concluded within the time stipulated, and the reasons are not attributable to the petitioner, a report shall be filed before this Court explaining the reasons for such delay and action taken on the persons responsible for not adhering to the time fixed by the Court. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 3rd April, 2017 Rds