Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
T.Prabhavathii vs State Of Ap on 8 July, 2019
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT PETITION No. 8347 of 2019
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any action on the petitioner's representations dated 08.09.2018 and 26.6.2019 as illegal and arbitrary.
It is stated that the petitioner is an employee working as Nursing Superintendent and thereafter promoted as Assistant Director (Nursing Department) in SVIMS University, Tirupati. It appears that she has produced a fake certificate to the effect that Sri B.V.Subba Reddy, who is her husband was dependant on her and drawn an amount of Rs.4,53,025/- towards reimbursement of medical expenses spent on him during the years 2007-2008. Thereafter, it was brought to the notice of the respondent No.2 that the petitioner's husband is not dependent on her and that he deriving an income of more than Rs.30,000/- per month by way of house rents etc., As such, the petitioner produced fake certificate to have wrong gain and thereby cheated the respondent No.2 management and indulged in committing an act of misconduct in violation of the conduct rules. The respondent No.2, has, therefore, issued proceedings dated 29.06.2011 suspending the petitioner. Appropriate charges were framed and disciplinary action was 2 initiated against her. Thereafter, respondent No.2 vide proceedings dated 03.01.2012 imposed major punishment of removal of the petitioner from service. Questioning the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Execution Board and also filed a writ petition in WP No.35799 of 2012 and the same is pending adjudication.
It is also stated that respondent No.2 also initiated criminal proceedings for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 488, 471 and 420 IPC, which is the subject matter of CC No.471 of 2014 on the file of the court of IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi. The petitioner was found guilty of the offence under Section 420 IPC and the trial court by its Judgment dated 08.02.2016 convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default, shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.57 of 2016 on the file of the court of III Additional District Judge, Tirupathi. The lower appellate court by Judgment dated 07.06.2018 allowed the appeal and has set aside the Judgment passed by the trial court and acquitted the petitioner. In view of the said acquittal order, the petitioner has made written representations dated 18.09.2018, 17.09.2018 and 26.6.2019 to the respondent No.2 requesting 3 to consider the fact that she was acquitted in the criminal case and to set aside the order of removal from service, and to reinstate her into service. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.2 did not consider her representations till date.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lower appellate court acquitted the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 IPC. He submits that since the findings in the criminal case prevail over the findings in the departmental enquiry, the respondent No.2 ought to have considered the representation of the petitioner and ought to have reinstated her into service.
Perused the material available on record. The very fact that WP No.35799 of 2012 was filed questioning the order of termination and the same is pending adjudication, may not come in the way of disposal of the representations of the petitioner. The only grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that no orders are passed on her representations submitted to the respondent No.2. In that view of the matter, the respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the representations submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
4
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J 08.07.2019 Mjl /* 5 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No. 4787 of 2013 Dismissed as withdrawn 08.07.2019 Mjl/*