t32s2l

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

WRIT PETITION NO: 23229 OF 2023

Between:

T. Sampath, S/o T. Murali, Aged about 54 years, Occ ;Junior Assistant (Now

removed), O/o Principal Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal, Rl/o H.No.2-4-86,

Ramnagar, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District.

.....PETITIONER

AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep by Principal Secretary IVedical and Health

Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare Telangana State,

Hyderabad.

3. The District Collector, Hanumakonda District, Hanumakonda.

4- The Principal Kakatiya Medical College, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda

Drstrict.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitutron of India praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of

Writ of Certiorari call for the records pertaining to Proceedings vide RC No.

E2l36O0l2O21 , dt.2211212o21 issued by the 4th respondent, declare the same as

illegal, arbitrary, pervasive, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and violation

of Art. 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.

ir-

i-.'

,N

9'

l.A.NO:1 OF 2023

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ rmstances stated in

the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cor.rr. may be pleased to

Suspend the lmpugned Proceedings issued by the 4th resp: rdents vide RC No.

E21360O12021 , dt.2211212j21, duly reinstate the petitioner ir o service forthwith,

subject to out of the above writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.D.PHANI KUMAR

Counsel for the Respondents : AGP FOR SERVICES - ll

The Court made the following ORDER

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

WRIT PETITION No. 232290F2o23

ORDER

Heard Sri T.D.Phani Kumar, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Services-Il appearing

on behalf of the resPondents.

2 Theetaoner aooroachedthis Cort seekino thet

I

t

I

I

I

I

ver as under:

".....to issue a Writ, order or direction more

particularly one in the nature Writ of Certiorari call for

the records pertaining to Proceedings vide RC

No.E2l3600/2021, dated 22-12-2021 issued bv the 4th

respondent, declare the same as illegal, arbitrary,

pervasive, vlolation of principles of natural justice and

violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of

India and consequently set aside the same and

pass...... "

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner

was appointed as a Junior Assistant in the 4th respondent Medical

Institution in 1985 and served for 21 years without any adverse

record. On 22-05-2018. a news item in Namasthe Telangana

r

2

alleged that iake certificates were issued by MGfl Hospital staff

in the name of Erragadda Mental Hospital' Based 'ln

a report by

the Director General, Vigilance and Enforcemen dated 2O-A2-

2020, the petitioner was suspended on 21-09-2l20 Despite

submitting an explanation denying the allegaticr s' respondent

No.3 framed charges, and respondent No'4' 'Jrl rout assigning

reasonS or considering the explanation,

paSSed t,r cers removing

the petitioner trom servic e on 22-12-2021'

Ac1 ;rieved by the

same, ihe petitioner filed the present writ petitior

S N,I

A F'.No.232 29,2023

4. PESED THE RECR

A)Thereleva ntDOrtionoftheDrocellinqsofthe

resoenN.4 i.e.Pri ncalKkaaM(dicalcolleoe,

Hauakndvleroeetn 2361),/2o2dated

1i heetaoerherei tlseracted

2120 ud

heuder:

PROCEEDINGS OF THE PRINCIPAL, KAKATIYA MEI)I: \I COLLEGE'

HAU N IVl AKON DA

PTESENT: DT.D.MOHAN DAS, M.S

PrincrPal/Add itional D'M E

'

Proc. Rc. No.E2l3600/2021

Daled

'i

12 2027

1

ESTT-TSlvl&HS Public Services - Report of Vigllance &

-aii".."-.",

Department-GAD Department

^

lverse News

prUfi.n"l-

'"

Nurnurt" Telangana under capt I ) 'UDYoGALA

i<6lnr"r"-aoonoARI on 22l0i/2018 fake-.Ms'1rc rl l.valrdation

iJiiii-a". o".ket issued bv 6ri T' sAMPATH I Inior Assistant

sub:

3

SN,J

W.P.No.23229 2023

Olo Princrpal, Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal - Appointed

Enquiry Officers to conduct detailed enquiry - Enquiry Officers

submitted Enquiry Reports Servtces-ORDERS Issued-Regarding.

Imposing of Major Punishment of Dismissal from Services -

ORDERS Issued Rega rd ing.

Ref:i. The Pnncrpal Secretary to Govt. General Admin Department,

TS, Secretanat Hyderabad, letter No 2204/Ser.A2/2O20, Dt:

t4/os/2020.

2, Rc. No. A5/7315/2020-2 Dated 31/08/2020 of District

Collector, Warangal Urban D istrict.

3. Rc. No E2/2171/2020, Dated 77109/2020 of Princrpal, K.tvl.C.

Warangal.

4. Charge l.4emo Rc, No E2/2t7112020, Dt 2l/09/2020 of

Princrpal, Kl4C, W9l.

5, Rc. No E2/2171/2020, Dated 21109/2020 of Principal, K.M.C

Warangal.

6. Explanation of the indivrdual, dated 05.10.2020.

7. File No. REV/A 5/M ISC/0001/2020-COLL WGL U, Dt:

05/10/2020 of the Collector & District Magistrat€, Warangal

Urban.

8. File No. REV/AS/M ISC/O O07/2O2O COLL WGL U, Dt 72/10/2020

of the Collector & Drstrict Magistrate, Warangal Urban.

9. Suspension Order vide Rc. No. E212604/2020, Dt t9/ t0/2O2O

of Kl4C, Warangal.

10. Enquiry Officer vide Rc. No E21260412020, Dt: 28/lol2020 &

20/11/2020 of KMC, Wgl.

11. Enquiry Report submitted by the Enquiry Officers Dated:

24/Oa/2027.

12. Show cause Notice of this office vide Rc. No. E2/36oo/2027,

ot 26/ 10/2027

13. Explanation of the individual Dated 12/7f12027.

14. Rc No. E2/3600/202L, Dt. 04/1212021 of Principal, K.M.C.

Hanumakonda.

15. Explanation of the individual Dated: 74/72lzOZt.

\/HEREAS, vrde reference 1" to 2"d cited that, the Hon'ble Collector &

Drstrict lvlagrstrate, Warangal Urban has directed to take necessary actton as

per the recommendations of the Vigilance and Enforcement department report

basing on the adverse news published rn Namasthe Telangana darly News

Pdper captroned as "UDYOGALA KOSAM ADDADH ARI" on 22/05/2018, alleging

involvement of employees of K.M.C./M.G.M., Hospital regarding issued of fake

certificates in the name of Erregadda Mental Hospttal, Hyderabad to the

Government employees who made request on medical invalidatron grounds.

4

sN,l

No.23229 2023

HosPrtal,

the explanation submitted by tf I individual vide

the Principal, Kakatiya Medical Ccrll€ le' Hanumakonda

Sri. T, SAMPATH, lLrnror Asslstant of this office working rrr I

Warangal ts rnvolved in this case'

WHEREAS, the power conferred by the sub rule ( 1) f rule of

(l C A

Rules 1991, the Principal' Kakatrya Medical College' Wa

-'

ngal is hereby

placed Sri. T SAf4PATH, lunior Assrstant under suspensron

u I il further orders

by pending enqulry against hrm vide reference 9'h cited

wHEREAS, this office has framed Article of Charq(: against Sri T'

SAMPATH, lunior Assistant vide reference 5th cited'

WHEREAS, rrr accordance wlth reference 7'h & 8tn cit: I this offrce has

appointed Enquiry Offrcers to conduct the detailed inquiry ii: reference 1Oth

cited.

WHEREAS, the Enqulry Offrcers have submitted deta l:d enquiry report

vide reference 11rn crted in which the Article of Charges frarr ld aqainst Sri T'

SAMPATH, lunlor Assistant (Under Suspension) are proved

thrs office has tssued the Show C')i: 3 Notice to the

rence 12tr'cited to called for the explanl ron that' why the

of drsmrssal of service should not impo'l( ( aqainst him'

therndividualhassubmittedtheexplal];llonVidereference

G.lv1

W H EREAS,

individual vide refe

major PU

n ish men t

W H EREAS,

13tf' to 14'h cited.

After examine

refeTence 15th cited,

has decided to rmpose the major punishment of dismissa

Sri. T. SAMPATH, lunlor Assistant (Under Suspension) wi't

The Office Su Perin

te ndent'Accounts section of tf s offlce is hereby

)f services aga inst

mmediate effect.

r force

directed to take necessary action accordrngly as per rule:;

F RINCIPAL

5

5N,l

W.P.No.23229 2023

Kakatiya Medical College

HANUMAKONDA.

To

Sri T.SAMPATH, Junior

Ramnagar, Hanu makonda

Special lvlessenger.

Assistant (Under Suspension) R/o. H.No.2-4 86,

. (By. Regd. Post/Ack due) and I also send through

Copy to the Supenntendent ofAccounts section of this OFfice for necessary

informatron.

Copy submitted to the Distnct Collector, Hanumakonda for information.

Copy submitted to the Director for Medical Education, Telangana, Hyderabad

for inFormation,

Copy submitted to the Director ot public

Health & Family Welfare, Telangana,

Hyderabad for in formatton.

Copy submltted to Vrgilance Commrssroner, T.S., Secretariat, Hyderabad for

informatron.

Copy submitted to the Princlpal Secretary to Govt

Secretariat, H ydera bad.

General Admrn Dept., T.S.,

B)The releva nt Dortion of the order dated O6.12.202L

passed in W.P.No.122 ol 2O2l isextracted hereunder:

4. "The learned counsel for the petitioner has

contended that a perusal of the Rule 25(1) of the Rules,

1991 clearly states that whenever any employee is

convicted by the competent Criminal Court, the

disciplinary authority need not conduct any enquiry and

straight away, based on the conviction, he can be

removed. But in the instant case, no conviction has

been awarded by the competent Criminal Court and

only FIR in Crime No.131 of 2O2t dated 19.04.2021 on

the file of Matwada police

Statlon, Warangal District,

has been registered against the petitioner on the

complaint given by the 3,d respondent and the same is

6

pending. Therefore, learned counsel for the

has contended that the disciplinary autho'

respondent ought not to have invoked pct

Rule 25( 1) of the Rules, 1991 and impc'st

penalty of removal on the petitioner' Lear'

for the petitioner has further contended th't

the Rules, 1991 reads as follows:

" 25. SPecial Procedur

Notwithstandlng anYthing

Rule 24.

e in certaln cases:

contained in Ru t 20 to

SN,I

tt .P.No.23229 2023

petitioner

.y i.e., 3'd

rr:rs u nder

.l a major

rd cou nsel

llule 25 of

nment

ed to

r:d for

is not

n the

i,r :he

s not

nanneT

,r the

orders

Genl.

(i) Where ocnalty is imposed on a Gov

i"ruun, on the qround of conduct which I ; I

his conviction on a criminal charge, or

(ii) When the disciplinary authorily is sa''i

I

i"uto.t to be recorded by rt in wrltlng thet

reasonably practicable to hold an inqui-1

manner provided in these rules, or

(iii) Where the governor is satisfied thal

interest of the security of the State, i'

expedient to hold any inquiry in the

provided in these Rules,

The disciplinary authority may constrl

circumstances of the case and make sucr

thereon as it deems fit:

I x x x ] (Proviso deleted by G'O' Rt'No'6'1')

Admn. (Ser-C), Dot 29.12.1993)

Provided that the Commission shall be;rr sulted'

where such consultation is necessary, bef'e any

orders are made in any case under this rul(

IProvided further that no such consultation I th the

tommission is necessary before any ori:-s are

made under clause(i) of this rulel

(Added G.O M.S No.240, G'A (5ec-C) Dt:p Dated

14.08.2003.

I

-

1

5N,j

W.P.No.23229 2023

A perusal of the said Rule clearly states that the

disciplinary authority can invoke the said power where

an employee has been convicted by the competent

Criminal Court or where the disciplinary authority is

satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that

it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner

provided in these Rules.

B. Moreover, while alleging stigma against

the petitioner, the disciplinary authority is bound to

conduct enquiry and only after giving reasonable

opportunity to the petitioner, the respondents have to

pass the impugned orders. But in the instant case, no

such enquiry is conducted. Therefore, on these

grounds, the impugned order dt.02-04-2021 is liable to

be set aside and accordingly the same is set aside. The

respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into

service with all consequential benefits. It is always

open for the disciplinary authority to take action

against the petitioner in accordance with law. No costs.

c)The relevant Dortion of the order dated 04.04.2022

Dassed in W.P.No.16772 of 2022 is extracted hereunder:

"The learned counsel For petitioner submits that

the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely

covered by the order dated L6.12.2021 passed by this

Court in W.P.No.12902 of 202I and the same is not

disputed by the learned Government Pleader for

Services-II.

8

5N,.i

/ P. N o.23 229 2023

In view of the same and following -he order

passed in the above writ petition' the wr t )etition is

allowed in terms thereof, setting aside the impugned

Order vide Rc.No.B420IVC-E/2021 datecl t7 t'2022

issued by the 2nd respondent and f-

-ther

the

respondents are directed to reinstate the pe- roner into

service with all consequential benefiis Ho'n':ver' it is

open for the disciplinary authority to tal''(r action' tn

accordance with law' The miscellaneous

petitions

pending, if any, shall stand closed There s rall be no

order as to costs. "

D) The relevant

portion of the order dat!d2.1.2022

xtractehe reunder:

e

s INW.P.No.26078 of2021rse

10. "Having regard to the rival contenir- rs and the

material on record, this court finds 1l at similar

circumstances had arisen in W P No'12902'' ct 2O2l and

vide orders dated t6 12'2021, this

considered the issue at length and in Par;

has held as under:

-ou rt had

Nos.3 to B

"3. it has been contended by the petiti )ner that

his mother was employed as Mult Purpose

Health Assistant with the respondent; 'and

the

petitioner's mother has been retired c r medical

invalidation grounds vide proceedings It 06-12-

20216. Thereafter, the petitioner has : ubmitted

an application on 14-06- zolf lo cc r sider his

case for appointment on com I lssionate

9

SN,]

W.P.No.23229 2023

grounds. Thereafter. the respondents were

pleased to consider his case for compassionate

appointment on compassionate grounds vide

proceedings dt.06-07-2017 and subsequenfly

the petitioner's services were regularized vide

proceedings dt.24-07-2019. While petitioner is

discharging his duties as OFfice Subordinate, it

has been alleged by the respondents that a news

item has been published in the local newspaper

on 22-O5-2OLB alleging that some of the

employees of M.G.M. Hospital, Warangal, have

secured employment by producing fake

certificate in the name oF Erragadda Mental

Hospital, Hyderabad, and based upon the said

news item, the 4th respondent had issued show

cause notice to the petitioner on 2l_ lL_2020.

Alleging that the petitioner has produced fake

certificate at the time of securing employment

and that the petitioner has submitted a detailed

explanation denying the said charges over the

3rd respondent had straight away imposed

orders of removal vide proceedings dt.02-04_

2021 by invoking the powers under Rule 25 (1)

of the Rules, 1991.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has

contended that a perusal of the Rule 25 (1) of

the Rules, 1991 clearly states that whenever any

employee is convicted by the competent Criminal

Court, the disciplinary authority need not

10

conduct any enquiry and straight awav based

on the conviction, he can be removed t'r t in the

instant case, no conviction has been a"tt rCed by

the competent Criminal Court and orr 1 FIR in

Crime No.131 of 2O2t dt.19-04-2021 cr the file

of Matwada Police Station, Warangal Dr! t

-

ct' has

been registered against the petitionc- on the

complaint given by the 3rd responderl and the

same is pending. Therefore, learned

(l('|r nsel for

the petitioner has contended that the drs:iplinary

authority i.e. 3rd respondent ouqht not fo

'ave

invoked powers under Rule 25 ( 1) of tl e Rules'

1991 and imposed a major penalty 'l'

removal

on the petitioner. Learned couns€rl for the

petitioner has further contended that tl rle 25 of

the Rules, 1991 reads as follows:-

procedure in certa in

anything contained in RtLll

S N,J

\.P.No.23229 2023

CASCS:

20 to Rule

"25. SPecial

Notwithstanding

24-

(i) where penalty is imposed on a Cio

servant on the ground of conduct whi: I

to his conviction on a criminal charge, l-

(ii) where the disciplinary authority

for reasons to be recorded by it in wti

is not reasonably practicable to holc

in the manner provided in these rules,

ern ment

has led

s sa tisfiec

. rg that it

t n inquirY

(r

1,1,

5N,J

W-P.No.23229 2023

(iii) where the Governor is satisfied that in the

interest of the security of the State, it is not

expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner

provided in these Rules.

the disciplinary authority may consider the

circumstances of the case and make such orders

thereon as it deems fii :

I x x x ] (Proviso deleted by G.O.Rt.No.6421,

Genl. Admn. (Ser.-C),Dt.29-12-1993) Provided

that the Commission shall be consulted, where

such consultation is necessary, before any

orders are made in any case under this rule.

IProvided further that no such consultation with

the Commission is necessary before any orders

are made under clause (i) of this rule.l (Added

by G.O.Ms.No.240, G.A. (Ser-C) Dept., Dt.14-

0B- 2003)

A perusal of the said Rule clearly states that the

disciplinary authority can invoke the said power where

an employee has been convicted by the competent

Criminal Court or where the disciplinary authority is

satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that

it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner

provided in these Rules.

5. Learned counsel

that none of these

for the petitioner has contended

factors were there in the instant

t2

S N,J

'

P. No.2 3229-202 3

case and nowhere the disciplinary autl-( rity has

assigned reasons why it is not practicable 1( conduct

enquiry against the petitioner' Whene ver the

disciplinary authority is alleging stigma I J )inst the

petitioner, the respondents are bound tl conduct

enquiry so as to give opportunity to irove

his

innocence. But in this case, no opportunity ir given to

the petitioner and straight away imposed maj rr penalty

of removal vide proceedings dt'02-04-202L further

directed the respondents to reinstate the pet I oner with

all consequential benefits '

6. Learned Government Pleader for ;ervices-1I

appearing for the respondents has contend: J that the

disciplinary authority has ample power unde' Rule 25 of

the Rules, 1991 to discern whether the regrr ar enquiry

is required or not and the allegation levelled gainst the

petitioner is that the petitioner ha: secured

employment on compassionate grounds' I lsed upon

the fake medical certificate produced by his r

-rother

and

that the show cause notice issued to the F ltitioner is

only after following principles of natural justi .e and only

after following the due procedure, the lisciplinary

authority has imposed major penalty of 't: noval from

service. Therefore, the Writ Petition has no merits a nd

the same ls liable to be dismissed'

7. Having regard to the rival submissions; r rade by the

parties, this Court is of the considered vir: v that Rule

25 of the Rules, 1991 could not have irrtked by the

disciplinary authority as none of the three eventualities

which were stipulated in Rule 25 are attracting in the

instant case and no reason was recorded by the

disciplinary authority as it is not practicable to conduct

enquiry against the petitioner. Therefore, invoking Rule

25 (1) or Rule 25 of the Rutes 1991 itself is not

warranted in the instant case. Therefore, the impugned

order of removal dt.02-04- 2021 is set aside as none of

the eventualities mentioned in Rule 25 of the Rules are

not being attracted in the instant case.

B. Moreover, while alleging stigma against the

petitioner, the disciplinary authority is bound to conduct

enquiry and only after giving reasonable opportunity to

the petitioner, the respondents have to pass the

impugned orders. But in the instant case, no such

enquiry is conducted. Therefore, on these grounds, the

impugned order dt.02-04-2O2t is tiable to be set aside

and accordingly the same is set aside. The respondents

are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with

all consequential benefits. It is always open for the

disciplinary authority to take action against the

petitioner in accordance with law. No costs".

E)The Counter affidavithas been filed on behalf

1,3

SN,J

W.P.No.23229 2023

of the

dent Nos.1 to 4 and in oarticlar oaraoraohNo.s isResoon

extracted here u nder:

1,4

SCUSSION ANDcoNCLUSION:-

5. Learned cun

sN'l

t,. No.23229-2023

"5. It is respectfully submitted that' L asinq on

the departmental enquiry report the petit t ner was

issued show cause notice by Principal Kakati'/ r medical

college vide letter Rc' No'E2/3600/20 1 Dated

26.70.2021 proposing the major punis - Ient of

Dismissal from service and to submit explanat on within

7 days of receipt of the notice duly following

r.rncrple of

natural JUstice.

The petitioner in response to the show

causenoticerequestedtoprovideacopyofltr:enquiry

report and accordingly the petitioner was isst:d a copy

of the enquiry report for submission of this

'):planation

through letter Rc.No.E2/360012021

Dated ' '122021'

After recerpt of the enquiry report the pe 't t ioner on

14.12.2O2t has submitted a detailed exp

'

r ation and

the Princrpal, Kakatiya Medical College has p rr-sued the

explanation of the basing on Principles of na ral justice

and issued final orders imposing the major [ -rnishment

of dismissal rrom service against the pet i ioner and

issued dismissal order through Iroc Rc'

No.E2l3600/2021 Dated 22'12'2021' Th:

'efore the

action of the respondent is in accordance vr 'h law and

no illeqality or illegality is committed in isuing' the

imposed order. "

aron llhalf het

etitiorminlu-fohheIIwlnst bmissions:-

I

15

SN,I

W .P .No.23229 2023

i) The petitioner, who is a Junior Assistant, is in no way

connected with the issuance or validation of certiFicates by the

appointing authorities of the concerned department and has

been falsely implicated in a case involving the issuance and

validation ot fake certificates in the name of Erragadda Mental

Hospital to Government employees.

i,) The petitioner was placed under suspension on 2I.Og.2O2O

and, upon being served with a charge sheet, the petitioner

submitted his expranation and preaded ignorance. Nevertheress,

a criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.

319 of 2020 on 31.12.2020 for the alleged commission of

orfences punishabre under section s 420, 468, and 477 of rpc.

iii) The disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner

were also based on the same set of allegations. However, a final

report was submitted by the Sub_Inspector of police, p.S.

Matwada, treating the case as a mistake of fact and accepting

the said final report, the VI Additional ludicial Magistrate of First

Class, Warangal, vide order dated lB.OS.2022 in Crime No. 319

of 2020 in R.C.C. No. 01/2021, passed a docket order accepting

the Final report filed by the Sub_Inspector of police, p.S.

Matwada.

16

iv) In view of the fact that a final report was sull 1 itted before

the concerned Court treating the case as a mistak: rlf fact' the

disciplinary

proceedings could not havebeerr contin ued '

However, to the Petitioner's

shock'the imPugn(r(order dated

22.72.202I vide Proceedings No R'C No' EZl3(t ol2027 was

issued by the Principal, Kakatiya Medical College' l-

'

rrumakotrda'

imposing the malor punrshment i'e'' dismissal of 1-re petitioner

f rom the service

vi) The respondent No 4 failed to

submitted by the petitioner and did

details furnished in support of the

explanation dated 14 12'2021' which

framed against him'

5 N,l

/ , o.21229-2023

verifY tt e exPlanation

not consi J lr the sPecific

petitlone' '; case in the

pertained :o the charges

v) A show cause notice vide Rc'No'E2/360-t2O2l'

daled

26.10.2O7L was issued by the 4th respondent tc he petitioner

and the petitioner submitted a detailed explana - )n to the 4th

respondent oo 14'12'2021 to the said show caus. notice issued

to the petitioner' However' without considering

tt (l explanation

furnished in response to the said show cause Ir 'tice'

a lnajor

punishment of dismissal from service was inl rosed on the

petitioner by the respondent No 4 with immediat€ )rfect'

tffi

77

S N,J

w .P .No.23229 2023

vii) Without conducting disciplinary proceedings in accordance

with due procedure,

and without affording the petitioner

an

opportunity of personal hearing or permitting the petitioner

to

examine witnesses to establish the truth, a major punishment

of

dismissal from service was imposed without assigning any

reasons. Therefore, thermpugned order is liable to be set aside.

Basdo eaforsadsubmisstons,thelearn

t

us alnn alfe nro dt

thatheoetitioner it sentitledfortherelaspravedief for

bvteDetionntheprsentwrit oetition.

rt

6, Learned Assistant Government pleader

for Services_iI

appearing on behalf of the respondents placing reliance on the

averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalr of the

respondents, in particular paragraph No.S, contended that,

based on the departmental

enquiry report, a show cause notice

dated 26.IO.2021 was issued to the petitioner

rmpositlon of the major punishment

of dismissal

and an explanation was called for from the petitioner.

Upon the

petitioner's

request, a copy of the enquiry report was furnished,

and petitioner

submitted expranation on 14.72.2027. After

perusing the petitioner,s

explanation, the principal,

Kakatiya

proposing

the

from service,

Medical College, passed the impugned order o1 dismissal on

22.12.2021 and the same is in conformity with t.i t principles of

natural justice and therefore' the

warrant interference by this Court'

impugned l

- ler does not

18

S N,,J

\'/ ) No 23229. 2023

LerndAsistnGvernmen Pe( r,however,

irlmitsthata reqlardeDartmental enur

rded

asn

a

t

7

q w

t a

cedandtheetitinerwsn affo

n

reasnable opDOrtunitvof hearl nq,norwas leermle

rtheless,re rmDUoned

t alnthewitnesses.Neve

orwsased.

8. This Court opines that the petitioner is enti led to grant of

relief and petitioner's services cannot be trl minated in a

summary and arbitrary manner without com: ying with the

principles of natural lustice

and without conclr'r ltinq a regular

enquiry- As borne on record' the order of re^

'oval

had been

passed against the petitioner attributing miscon( uct on the part

of the petitioner; however, the same had not : len established

through a proper enqurry' Therefore' the impuqr ed order' dated

22.t2.2027 issued by the 4th respondent is in

( lear violation of

Rule 20 of the CCA Rules, since the petiti( ner cannot be

terminated unilaterally without due process'

%iyffiffiffin,a*r* ;ffi.:;.iffiffi . i iffire,, are

.

ir{.} :il{5-:--1 4

I

i

i

I

19

SN,J

W.P.No.23229

2023

9. Learned counsel appearing

onbehall of the petitioner

submits that the decision inW.P. No.12902 of 202t, dated

76.12.2027, has been foilowed by this Court in W.p. No. 16772 of

2022 vide order dated 04.04.2022 and atso in W.p. No.26078 of

2021, vide order dated 29.11.2022.

10, Taking into consideration the orders of this Court passed

under iden tica I circumstances

W.P. No.26078 of 202L, as

in W.p. No.76772 of 2O22 and

well as the judgment in W. p.

No.12902 of 2027, this Court opines that the impugned order

issued by the 4rh respondent is bereft of reasons and passed

in

clea r violation ofthe mandatory procedure

required for

conducting

aregular inquiry, hence, the impugned order is

vitiated and is liable to be set aside

11. TAINGINTo DET

A) The aforesaid facts and circumstances

of the case,

b) The submissions

made by the learned counset

appearing on behalf of the petitioner

and the learned

Assistant Government pleader

for Services_ff appearing

on behalf of the respondents,

0

S N,I

W I No.2 32 29-2023

c)The averments made in the counter affid I vit filed on

behalf of respondent Nos'1 to 4 and ir particular'

paragraph No.5 (referred to and extracted abo re)'

d) The impugned proceedings dated 22"1''"2O2t vide

R.C No.E2l36O0 /2O2L issued by Principa l' Kakatiya

Medical College, Hanumakonda

addresst d to the

petitioner herein (referred to and extracted at ove)'

e) The order of this Court dated O8'O6'2(r::1

passed in

W.P No.129 02 of 2021 (referred to and extra( ted above)'

f) The relevant portion of the order of thi: Court dated

O4.O4.2O22

passed in W'P No'L6772 of 2022 (referred to

and extracted above)'

S) The relevant portion of the order of thi; Court dated

29.tt.2(l22

passed

'n

W'P No'26078 ot 2O2" ' (referred to

and extracted above)'

h)The discussion and conclusion as arriverl at para Nos's

to 1O of the Present

order'

ThWri ion isllowedandhe in t

puonedorder

d 212

P

2

tit

dR.co.E23oot2Ltssuedbv

:r

2L

5N,j

W .P.No.23Z?g

2023

hRsondenN4is

th tae

drdt tntethetirinntr I

neentienefitsI

tstiar Uh lsart

teraear

ar

ea

brt

e

actionaqa

1nstthEDetitioner,fthereSDondentstnendo

dosotnaccordancetolawtncnformlwtththe

tnleonar s atcttvde

etiti

nert

n n tltwt

ea H I

u

erh

urato

f

e

t

n t

costs.

Miscellaneous

closed.

applications, iF any, pending shall stand

SD/. S.MALLIKARJUNA RAO

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

To

SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, Secretariat, State of

Telangana at Hyderabad.

2. The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare Telangana State,

Hyderabad.

3. The District Collector, Hanumakonda District, Hanumakonda.

4. The Principal Kakatiya Medical College,, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda

District.

5. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES- il, High Court for the State of Telangana at

Hyderabad [OUT]

6. One CC to SRI T.D.PHANI KUtt/AR, Advocare IOPUCI

7. Two CD Copies

SA

TKS

Yt-

C.('. TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1010712025

ORDER

WP.No.23229 of 2023

ALLOWING THE W.P

WITHOUT COSTS.

I

a\

\-

'-l

o

\

%,

s"

'1,.,//

/,' \

,r'r:-

C<

o

Lr-

,& \

!-l

,i

r.f')i'

-'./cl

\D

coR(d

9<rr

-t6' ''