IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Writ Petition No.5148 of 2010 Between: C.J.S. Naidu .. Petitioner And State of A.P. rep. by its Principal Secretary Government (Political), General Administration Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents ORDER: (per Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed assailing G.O. Rt. No.5234 General Administration (SC.D) Department, dated 07-10-2006 issued by the 1st respondent, on the ground that it is illegal and void. The orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short “the Tribunal”) passed in O.A. No.1992 of 2007, dated 07-08-2009, are also assailed as being arbitrary and erroneous. It is stated that the petitioner was appointed initially as Assistant Section Officer in Andhra Pradesh Secretariat in 1978 and thereafter appointed by transfer as Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO) in Kakinada Division in Zone-II in 1994. While he was working as ACTO, for the alleged irregularities in the General Administration Department, A.P. Secretariat during 1991-1994, he was given show cause notice dated 12-03-1997 by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (2nd respondent), questioning which he filed O.A. No.1702 of 1997, which was dismissed as premature in view of the pendency of criminal proceedings. It is also stated that though he submitted explanation to the said show cause notice, no further action has been taken thereon. While so, G.O. Rt. No.5234 dated 07-10-2006 was issued to him by the 1st respondent-Principal Secretary (Political), General Administration Department, who is not at the present controlling officer and not competent to initiate department proceedings, has initiated departmental proceedings again for the same irregularities, with a view to deprive him of promotion. Assailing the said G.O., he filed O.A. No.1992 of 2007, which was dismissed on 07-08-2009. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard Sri P.V. Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-II for respondents 1 to 3 and perused the order impugned. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without adverting to and considering the various factual and legal grounds raised in O.A. No.1992 of 2007 and especially without deciding whether once the Disciplinary authority initiated departmental proceedings, which are pending, another authority has such power to initiate another departmental proceedings for the same allegations, and also whether initiation of such second departmental proceedings after a lapse of fifteen years can be sustained, the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. only based on the facts narrated in the earlier O.A. No.2541 of 2004 which was filed by him for dropping further proceedings in the matter in view of his acquittal in the criminal proceedings. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the Tribunal for consideration of all the contentions raised in the O.A. on merits. Therefore, the common order, dated 07-08-2009 only in respect of dismissal of O.A. No.1992 of 2007 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad is set aside and the said O.A. is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits after considering all the contentions raised in the said O.A. in accordance with law after every reasonable opportunity to both parties. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the O.A. within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 09-03-2010 Svv