IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.9365 OF 2011 Date:11-04-2011 Between:- T.Ramnarayana Reddy .. Petitioner And Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Anantapur, rep.by its Registrar. .. Respondent ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in seeking to revert the petitioner from the post of Superintending Engineer (Electrical) to the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) by issuing the impugned show cause notice No.SKU/Estt/E1/2011 dated 04-02-2011, as arbitrary, discriminatory offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India and quash the same with a consequential direction to the respondent to continue the petitioner as Superintending Engineer (Electrical). 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present petition may be stated as follows: It is stated that the Executive Council of the University passed a resolution on 19-10-2006 requesting the Government to accord permission for upgradation of one post of Deputy Executive Engineer (Civil) to that of Executive Engineer (Electrical), which was refused, as there was no feasibility. But having regard to the resolutions passed by the Executive Council on 19-10-2006, and subsequently on 28-09- 2007, the post of Deputy Executive Engineer of the petitioner was upgraded and he was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) by proceedings of the Vice Chancellor dated 01-10-2007. The petitioner had reached the highest position in the pay scale of Superintending Engineer, which is the next higher post. The Vice Chancellor of the University, by proceedings dated 15-07-2009, issued orders of promotion to the petitioner as Superintending Engineer (Electrical) by upgrading the post of Executive Engineer held by him. However, the impugned show cause notice was issued by the respondent. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that in pursuance of the show cause notice, the petitioner requested the University authorities by letter, dated 21-02-2011, seeking certain information so as to enable him to give an explanation to the impugned show cause notice dated 04-02-2011 and without furnishing the said information, the respondent is going to revert the petitioner from the post of Superintending Engineer to Executive Engineer and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned show cause notice. 4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent fairly conceded that the information, as sought for by the petitioner, dated 21-02-2011, has not been furnished to the petitioner. 5. A retired Judge of this Court had submitted an enquiry report to the State Government with regard to certain illegalities allegedly committed by executive council of University. It seems that the University made certain written submissions before the learned retired Judge while conducting enquiry. According to petitioner, those submissions are relevant for the purpose of giving explanation to the impugned show cause notice. The person proceeded against must be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to defend himself. This requires that he should be given facility to examine and study the written submission sought to be put in evidence against him. Unless certain information as sought for by the petitioner is furnished, he may not be in a position to give proper explanation to the show cause notice. The University has to furnish that information especially when the petitioner was asked to give an explanation for reversion from the post of Superintending Engineer (Electrical) to the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical). So, the following relevant material has to be furnished to the petitioner viz., (1) the written submission made by the University before Justice Hanumanthu Commission with regard to the promotion to T.Ramanarayana Reddy as Superintending Engineer along with the documents supplied to the Committee relating to his promotion and (2) the rules/guidelines framed and followed by Sri Krishnadevaraya University for the promotion of Technical (Engineering) Staff. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent University to furnish item Nos.(1) and (2) of information required under letter dated 21-02-2011 to the petitioner within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After furnishing the said information, the petitioner has to give his explanation within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of the copy of the information sought for. After receipt of explanation, the respondents can take appropriate decision in accordance with rules and regulations governing the service conditions of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 11th April, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.9365 OF 2011 Date:11-04-2011 AMD