THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY W.P. No. 29656 of 2011 Dated 28-11-2011 Between: T.V. Subba Rao …Petitioner Vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Special Chief Secretary, Home, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY W.P.No. 29656 of 2011 Dated: 28-11-2011 ORAL ORDER: (Per: GR,J) The writ petition was misconceived as was the Original Application No. 6707 of 2008 which was rightly rejected by the learned Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), by the order impugned dated 12-09-2011. The relevant facts in very brief are that the petitioner retired as Junior Assistant in the Fire Services Department. He was suspended pending inquiry on allegations of fraudulent withdrawal of General Provident Fund Amounts of colleagues. He was also arrayed as an accused in two criminal cases in C.C.No. 15 of 1999 and C.C.No. 36 of 1999 before the learned IV-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada. Departmental proceedings were also initiated against him. In the departmental inquiry, by proceedings dated 31-08-1999 the petitioner after a due process of inquiry was awarded the penalty of dismissal from service with effect from 31-08-1999. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal the petitioner preferred O.A.No.5482 of 1999 before the Tribunal which by a common judgment dated 31-01- 2000 in the petitioner’s application as well as two connected applications set aside the order dismissing the petitioner from service. Aggrieved by his continued suspension pending inquiry, the petitioner ﬁled another application O.A.No. 7107 of 2001 which was disposed of by the order dated 10-10-2001 directing review of the petitioner’s case regarding his suspension pending inquiry. To cut the long story short, he was reinstated into service from his status of being under suspension pending inquiry but without prejudice to his prosecution and departmental proceedings. A fresh memorandum of charges was issued to which he submitted an explanation. By the judgment dated 01-04-2005 the petitioner was convicted in C.C.Nos. 15 and 36 of 1999 and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years each for oﬀences under Sections 409, 468 and 477-A IPC and to pay ﬁne of Rs.1000-00, in default to suﬀer Simple Imprisonment for two months for each of the said offences. He preferred criminal appeals which were allowed and by the judgment dated 19-07-2006 the sentence and conviction recorded against him were set aside. He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31-10-2002. In the above factual scenario, the Director General Fire Services addressed the State Government a letter dated 21-11-2007 intimating the sequence of events narrated above and sensitizing Government that necessary further action must be taken by the Government to award punishments in the case of retired employees under the provisions of the A.P. Civil Services (Classiﬁcation, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991. The Director General addressed another letter dated 01-02-2007 to the Government forwarding the report of District Fire Oﬃcer Services, Kakinada dated 07-11-2006 and the enquiry report dated 07-11-2006, for necessary action by the Government as it was the competent authority. Another memorandum dated 17- 07-2008 was issued by the Director General of Fire & Emergency Services calling for a detailed report from the District Fire Oﬃcer, Kakinada, to explain to how when serious attributions of misappropriation and fraudulent withdrawal of GPF Amounts and disciplinary action are pending against an oﬃcer, provisional pension, group insurance, family beneﬁt and GPF were sanctioned and paid to the petitioner in 2002 and 2003. Challenging the letters dated 01-02-2007 and 21- 11-2007 addressed by the Director General of Fire & Emergency Services to the Government and the Memorandum dated 17-07-2008 calling upon the District Fire Oﬃcer to submit a detailed report, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of O.A.No. 6707 of 2008 and therein sought consequential directions that all his retrial beneﬁts and ﬁxation of full pension beneﬁts with interest thereon should be granted. The Tribunal rejected the application by the order impugned ﬁnding no justiﬁcation for invalidating the letters dated 01-02-2007 and 21-11-2007 addressed by the Director General of Fire & Emergency Services to the Government nor the memorandum dated 17-07-2008 addressed to the District Fire Oﬃcer, Kakinada. The facts speak for themselves. The O.A. was misconceived and was rightly held so. We concur. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. __________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM ___________________________________ JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Dated: 28-11-2011 Pvks/*