P.S. Prasad, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

Betw een:

P.S. Prasad PETITIONER And

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Commercial Tax, Prohibition & Excise (VIG.V) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, and another. RESPONSENTS

ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice V. Ramasubramanian) Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal refusing to direct the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a time frame a retired Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise is before us.

2. Heard Mr. P.V.S.S.S. Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Pleader for Services (A.P) stated on written instructions that proceedings were initiated against nine officers and that out of them only two submitted their statement of defence to the charge memo. According to the learned Government Pleader the petitioner also did not submit his written statement of defence.

4. However, it is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner sought time to inspect the documents. We do not know whether it was a genuine request or dilatory tactics. Be that as it may, the completion of enquiry, at the earliest stage, will not only benefit the petitioner but also benefit the respondents. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. The order of the Tribunal is modified. The respondents are directed to complete the enquiry within a period of six months, subject to the cooperation of the petitioner. If the petitioner does not cooperate, the period of six months fixed herein cannot be put against them by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

11. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN _______________________ JUSTI CE G. SHYAM PRASAD 3rd November, 2016 Js.

Date: 03-11-2016 Js.