IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9025 of 2008 Between: G.Sivaramakrishna Tagore S/o.G.Lakshminarayana R/o.H.No.1-1-70/1, Junileepura Khammam Town and District ..... PETITIONER AND The Union of India., rep.by its Under Secretary to the Govt.of India Ministry of Home Affairs, 1st Floor, Loknayak Bhavan, Khan Market New Delhi .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the respondent dated 25.5.2006 is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent to continue to pay the pension in favour of the petitioner as usual and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the action of the respondent in suspending the provisional pension sanctioned to him w.e.f. 13.8.2003. The petitioner is a beneficiary under Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1980 (for short SSSPS) under proceedings dated 30.9.2003. Subsequently some complaints came to be presented to the authorities on the ground that the petitioner furnished incorrect date of birth to claim benefit under SSSPS scheme. An enquiry has been constituted and pending enquiry, provisional pension sanctioned to him came to be suspended under the proceedings impugned in this writ petition. The respondent filed counter affidavit. It is stated in the counter affidavit that necessary information has been called for from the State Government and final orders are to be passed on the complaint filed against the petitioner on receipt of certain information from the State Government. When this writ petition came up for admission hearing, counsel appearing for the parties consented for final disposal of the writ petition. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the persons who are inimical to the petitioner resorted to submit false complaints against the petitioner and the action basing on the said complaint by the respondent is not justified. A further submission has been made that though the petitioner submitted explanation to the show cause notice, no final order has been passed even after lapse of two years. A fact remains that the respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner calling for his explanation. Pending enquiry, provisional pension granted to the petitioner is kept under suspension. Since the petitioner submitted explanation to the respondent, there cannot be any impediment to the respondent to pass final orders. Such is the situation, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondent to pass final orders, pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, after considering the explanation offered by him within four months from today, failing which the provisional pension granted to him shall stand restored pending enquiry. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 4th July 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.9025 OF 2008 4TH JULY 2008.