Telangana High Court
The Union Of India And Another vs Ch. Ramesh Babu on 29 July, 2022
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
1
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
W.P.No.31008 OF 2022
ORDER:(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
".... to issue writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to order dated 30.06.2022 in O.A.No.119 of 2022 on the file of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad and quash the same by declaring it illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and pass such other order or further orders as deemed fit and proper."
Heard Sri B.Narasimha Sarma, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri N.Vijay, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent is working as Assistant Commissioner Central Taxes and while discharging his duties, he was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 17.05.2021. Challenging the said suspension proceedings, the respondent filed O.A.No.626 of 2021 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and the Tribunal has allowed the said O.A vide order dated 08.11.2021 directing the petitioners to review the suspension order in accordance with law as was done in O.A.No.388 of 2021. It is the further case of the petitioners that O.A.No.388 of 2021 was filed by the Superintendent, who was also placed under suspension and the said O.A.No.388 of 2021 was 2 allowed vide order dated 12.07.2021 by setting aside the suspension order.
Aggrieved by the order passed in O.A.No.626 of 2021, the petitioners have filed W.P.No.8603 of 2022 and as on the date, the matter was heard by this Court, the petitioners have already reviewed the suspension order and decided to continue the respondent under suspension vide order dated 08.02.2022. In those set of circumstances, this Court disposed of the writ petition on 17.02.2022 giving liberty to the respondent to challenge the revocation of suspension order dated 08.02.2022 before appropriate forum. Thereafter, the respondent has filed O.A.No.119 of 2022 before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Tribunal has erroneously granted interim order on 30.06.2022 and directed the petitioners to reinstate the respondent within ten days and if the said order is not complied with, serious view would be taken. Hence, the present writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioners had contended that the Tribunal ought not to have passed such an interim order directing the petitioners to reinstate the respondent into service, when serious allegations are levelled against the respondent. The Tribunal was not justified in interfering with the suspension order and directing the petitioners to reinstate the respondent into service. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in 3 the writ petition by setting aside the interlocutory orders passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.119 of 2022, dated 30.06.2022.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent had contended that the Inspector and Superintendent were placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 02.03.2021 and the respondent was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 17.05.2021 and in respect of Inspector and Superintendent, the petitioners have already reinstated them into service, but selectively, the petitioners have been continuing the respondent under suspension without there being any material on record.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent had further contended that continuing the respondent under suspension and reinstating the Inspector and Superintendent is arbitrary as the case of the said persons is identical to that of respondent. This particular fact was taken into consideration by the Tribunal and the petitioners were directed to review the suspension orders in O.A.No.626 of 2021. But, instead of reviewing the suspension orders in terms of orders passed in O.A.No.388 of 2021 dated 12.07.2021, the petitioners have selectively decided to continue the respondent under suspension vide proceedings dated 08.02.2022.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the suspension order was reviewed only on the ground that the petitioners are contemplating the writ 4 petitions against the orders passed in O.A.No.388 of 2021 and O.A.No.396 of 2021 and in fact, the petitioners have filed writ petitions before this Court and this Court closed the writ petitions on the ground that the Inspector and Superintendent were already reinstated into service. Therefore, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be set aside.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal ought not to have granted interim order directing the petitioners to reinstate the respondent into service, more so, when there are serious charges levelled against the respondent. Hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is for the Tribunal to adjudicate the matter independently by duly taking into consideration the fact that the other two individuals such as Inspector and Superintendent were also reinstated into service. The Tribunal is at liberty to pass final orders.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the order dated 30.06.2022 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.119 of 2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. Since it is brought to the notice of this Court that counter has already been filed by the 5 petitioners before the Tribunal, the Tribunal is directed to re- hear O.A.No.119 of 2022 and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
___________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,J ________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR,J Date: 29.07.2022 rkk 6