Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: draft charges in Udaragondi Rama Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 15 February, 2021Matching Fragments
The specific contention of the respondents before this Court is that, on account of pendency of the criminal proceedings against this petitioner, The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City herein/ Respondent No.5 addressed a letter in C.No.21/PR/2014dated 23.06.2015 with a request to send the stage of the ACB case against the petitioner and G.Ravindra Babu, PC-2408 and also send necessary draft charges against them for taking necessary action. Subsequently, Respondent No.l issued Orders vide Memo No.13/SC-A/A2/2016-1 dated 31.05.2016, the Director General of Police, A.P, Mangalagiri/Respondent No.2 vide memorandum Rc.No.902/Appeal-3/ACB/2014, dated 13.06.2016 requested the 5th respondent to issue orders of revocation of suspension of the petitioner and G.Ravindra Babu, PC-2408, Bhavanipuram PS, Vijayawada City and reinstated them into service, immediately, without prejudice to the cases pending against them. Accordingly the 5th respondent reinstated the petitioner into service without prejudice to the cases pending against him and posted him at different places. The 5th Respondent addressed a letter vide C.No.21/PR/2014-16, dated 26.06.2016 to MSM,J the 2nd respondent with a request to send draft charges against the petitioner and another accused in Anti-Corruption Bureau case to frame Articles of Charge against them and to proceed further in the departmental enquiry. In turn, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter to 1st respondent with a request to issue orders on the proposal of 5th respondent for orders to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner and another accused. The 1st respondent after careful examination of the final report of the Investigation Agency and keeping in view of the contentions raised by the petitioner and remarks of the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau thereon, have come to the conclusion that there are some discrepancies in the investigation of the case by Anti Corruption Bureau. The 1st respondent ordered vide G.O.Rt.No.381 Home (SC- A) Dept., dated 10.05.2017 to initiate departmental action against the petitioner instead of prosecution, on the allegation of corruption. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent was directed to take necessary action to initiate departmental action against the petitioner duly obtaining the articles of charges etc., on the allegation of corruption from Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau and submit the Oral Enquiry Report to Government at an early date for taking further action. On that the 1st respondent addressed a letter vide Rc.No.902/T3/ACB/2014 dated 21.06.2017 to the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau, A.P, Vijayawada with a request to send draft articles of charge, statement of imputations etc., directly to the 5th respondent to initiate departmental action against the petitioner as per the order of Government. The 5th respondent addressed a letters in C.No.21/PR/2014 dated 17.10.2014 and 26.04.2018 to the MSM,J Director General, ACB, AP, Vijayawada, with a request to furnish necessary draft charges against the petitioner and another accused for taking necessary action. While matters stood thus, the court of the Special Judge for SPE & ACB cases at Vijayawada issued order in R.C.S.No.6/2018 in Cr.No.12/RCT-ACB-VJA/2014, dated 21.08.2018 of ACB, Vijayawada Range closing the F.I.R against the petitioner since the complainant orally reported that he has no objection to close the F.I.R and further stated that he was reimbursed and also filed same in writing and the same is recorded. Again the 5th respondent addressed a letters in C.No.2l/PR/2014 dated 01.09.2018 and 19.11.2018 to the Director General, ACB, AP, Vijayawada with a request to furnish necessary draft charges against the petitioner and another accused for taking further action. The 1st respondent vide Memo No.4/SC.A/A2/20l4-13 date 05.07.2019 forwarded copies of draft articles of charge in respect of the petitioner and G.Ravindra Babu, PC-2408 to the 2nd respondent to frame Articles of Charge against them, obtain Statement of defence, examine the same and to appoint an Inquiring Authority to enquire into the charges framed against them and submit the Oral Enquiry Report along with provisional decision of the disciplinary authority, to the 1st respondent, for taking further action in the matter. The 2nd respondent vide Memorandum Rc.No.902/T3/ACB/2014 dated 26.07.2019 sent the copies of draft articles of charge in respect of the petitioner and G.Ravindra Babu, PC-2408 to 5th Respondent with a request to initiate Departmental action under Rule 20 of Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CC & A) Rules, 1991, against the petitioner and G.Ravindra Babu, PC-2408 and submit the enquiry MSM,J report and other material along with provisional decision of the 5th respondent, within the stipulated period prescribed in APCS (CC & A) Rules, 1991, for onward transmission to the 1st respondent, for finalization of the issue by the 1st respondent. On receipt of draft articles of charge by the 5th respondent on 30.07.2019, articles of charge vide C.No.21/PR/2014, dsyrf:18.03.2020 were served on the petitioner and receipt of the same was acknowledged on 23.03.2020, thus, the delay was on account of departmental procedure, but not for any other reason and hence, on the ground of delay, the Articles of Charges framed against this petitioner cannot be quashed.
S.No Letter and Date Addressed Addressed To Gist/request in the By letter 1 Dis.No.138/ADCP- Addl. DCP (Crimes) Commissioner Submitted Crimes/2014 Vijayawada City of Police, Preliminary report Dated 26.08.2014 Vijayawada mentioning ample City (R-5) evidence of accepting bribe 2 C.No.21/PR/2014 Commissioner of Request to send the Dated 23.06.2015 Police, Vijayawada stage of ACB case City (R-5) against the petitioner and to send necessary draft charges for taking necessary action 3 Memo No.13/SC- Principal Secretary to Commissioner To issue orders of A/A2/2016-1 Government (R-1) of Police, revocation of Dated 31.05.2016 Vijayawada suspension of the MSM,J And And City (R-5) petitioner Rc.No.902/Appeal-
3/ACB/2014 Director General of
Dated 13.06.2016 Police (R-2)
4 D.O.No.587/2016 Commissioner of Petitioner was
Dated 20.06.2016 Police, Vijayawada reinstated into
City (R-5) service
5 C.No.21/PR/2014- Commissioner of Director Request to send draft
16 Police, Vijayawada General of charges against the
Dated 26.06.2016 City (R-5) Police, A.P petitioner to frame
(R-2) articles of charge and
to proceed further in
departmental enquiry
6 Director General of Principal Requesting to issue
Police (R-2) Secretary to orders on the
Government proposal of
(R-1) Commissioner of
Police, Vijayawada
7 G.O.Rt.No.381 Principal Secretary to To initiate
Home (SC-A) Government (R-1) departmental action
Dept., against the petitioner
dated 10.05.2017 instead of
prosecution on the
allegation of
corruption.
Also directed the
Director General of
Police to take
necessary action to
initiate departmental
action against the
petitioner duly
obtaining the articles
of charges.
8 Rc.No.902/T3/ Principal Secretary to Director To send draft articles
ACB/2014 Government (R-1) General, ACB, of charge, statement
Dated 21.06.2017 Vijayawada of imputations
9 C.No.21/PR/2014- Commissioner of Director To furnish necessary
16 Police, Vijayawada General, ACB, draft charges against
Dated 17.10.2014 City (R-5) Vijayawada the petitioner for
And taking further
26.04.2018 necessary action.
10 R.C.S.No.6 of 2018 Special Judge for Closed the F.I.R
dated 21.08.2018 SPE & ACB Cases at
Vijayawada
11 C.No.21/PR/2014- Commissioner of Director To furnish necessary
16 Police, Vijayawada General, ACB, draft charges against
Dated 01.09.2018 City (R-5) Vijayawada the petitioner for
And taking further
19.11.2018 necessary action.
12 Memo Principal Secretary to Director Forwarded copies of
No.4/SC.A/A2 Government (R-1) General of draft articles of
/2014-13 Police, A.P charge in respect of
dated 05.07.2019 the petitioner to
(R-2) frame Articles of
Charge, obtain
written statement of
defence, examine and
to appoint an
Inquiring Authority to
enquire into the
charges
MSM,J
13 Rc.No.902/T3 Director General of Commissioner Sent copies of draft
/ACB/2014 Police, A.P (R-2) of Police, articles of charge in
dated 26.07.2019 Vijayawada respect of the
City (R-5) petitioner
14 Charges received by
Dated 30.07.2019 Commissioner of
Police, Vijayawada
City
16 the petitioner
Dated 18.03.2020
16 23.03.2020 Acknowledgment of
the charges by the
petitioner
It is not the case of the petitioner that, the respondents have slept over the matter without taking up the process for initiation of disciplinary proceedings against this petitioner. The respondents started this process by addressing letter C.No.21/PR/2014-16 dated 26.06.2016 which is at Serial No.5 of the table referred supra, by the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City to the Director General of Police, A.P requesting to send draft charges against the petitioner to frame articles of charge and to proceed further in the departmental enquiry, after reinstating the petitioner by order D.O.No.587/2016 dated 20.06.2016. But, the delay was on account of various stages of proceedings and in fact, the criminal prosecution against this petitioner was closed in R.C.S.No.6 of 2018 dated 21.08.2018 by the Special Judge for SPE & ACB cases at Vijayawada. The closure was on account of discrepancies in the investigation process by the Anti-Corruption Bureau officials. Whatever the reason may be for closure of the criminal prosecution against this petitioner, it is irrelevant for the purpose of deciding this issue.