IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.21232 of 2008 Between: M. Ramalinga Reddy, S/o. M. Ramachandra Reddy, O/o. The Commissioner of Employment and Traning, A.P., Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Labour Employment Training and Factories (Vig), Department, Secretariat Buildings, A.P., Hyderabad. .....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 a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction by calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent bearing GO Ms.No. 76, Labour Employment Training and Factories (Vig) Department, dt. 23-7-2005 and also orders of the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in OA No. 3711 of 2005 dt. 27-11-2006 and set aside the same with all consequential beneﬁts by declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the constitution of India, and erroneous and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.GOPAL RAO Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR LABOUR O R D E R: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to quash the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.3711 of 2005 dated 27-11-2006, whereunder the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. upholding G.O.Ms.No.76, dated 23-07-2005, imposing the punishment of major penalty of reduction to one lower stage in the pay scale of Rs.8,400/- 16,520/-, not being lower than to which the petitioner was directly recruited. The petitioner, who is a Deputy Director (Training), Oﬃce of the Commissioner of Employment and Training, A.P., Hyderabad, was imposed the aforesaid penalty for the following charge: “That he worked as Regional Deputy Director, Employment and Training, Visakhapatnam from 02-11-1991 to 19-06-1998. While working as such he has committed grave misconduct in as much as allowing 41 private candidates who applied to appear to NAC examination with bogus service certiﬁcates on the last day of the examination i.e., on 08-05- 1997, for corrupt consideration. Thus, he failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty in violation of Rule 3(1) (2) of AP Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.” Petitioner asserts that the other oﬃcers, who were charged along with him, were not found guilty of the misconduct though the evidence is common against all the delinquent oﬃcers and discrimination was shown against him. He further states that enquiry was not conducted in accordance with APCS (CC&S) Rules and imposition of punishment in the year 2005 for an incident that took place in 1997 is unjust. Respondent ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit stating that the petitioner issued Hall Tickets to 41 private candidates but though he stopped issuance of the Hall Tickets for three days having entertained a doubt about the genuineness of the certiﬁcates, he proceeded on issuing Hall Tickets on the last day of the examination i.e. 08-05-1997 and that itself shows that there was mala ﬁde intention. It is further stated that the enquiry oﬃcer found the petitioner guilty of admitting the candidates without verifying the genuineness of their certificates. The Tribunal noted that the misconduct alleged against the petitioner was that of issuing Hall Tickets to as many as 41 candidates, who were possessing fake certiﬁcates, and failed to discharge his duties diligently, that the motive attributed for that misconduct was held not proved by the Member of the Commission of Enquiries, that the enquiry report was accepted by the Government and issued G.O.Rt.No.76, dated 23-07-2005, imposing the penalty of reduction in time scale by one stage not lower than the stage to which he was directly recruited. The Tribunal, based on the enquiry report and the ﬁndings of the Member of the Commission of Enquiries, held that the petitioner was responsible for issuing Hall Tickets to as many as 41 candidates possessing fake certiﬁcates on the last date of the examination i.e., 08-05-1997 and declined to interfere with G.O.Rt.No.76 dated 23-07-2005. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the petitioner along with some other oﬃcers was charged with similar charges, the other oﬃcers were exonerated from the charges levelled against them while the petitioner was discriminated. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I. Since the charge levelled against the petitioner of issuing Hall Tickets without verifying the genuineness of the certiﬁcates was proved beyond reasonable doubt, this Court’s interference would not be justiﬁed in such a case. The scope of judicial review is narrow and limited. It is for the disciplinary authority to impose the punishment and it is not for this Court to mould the punishment unless there is any error apparent on the face of the record. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the order of the Tribunal suﬀers from any inﬁrmity necessitating interference of this Court. Hence, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. However in the circumstances without costs. _________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J ______________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD ,J Dt:26 -09-2008 usd To 1. The Principal Secretary, Govt of A.P., Labour Employment Training and Factories(Vig) Department Secretariat Buildings A.P Hyderabad. 2. Two CCs to GP for Services-I, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad, (OUT). 3. Two CD copies.