THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.6503 of 2005 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.R.II/GR-1 A/DP/4841 dated 20.1.2004 imposing punishment of withdrawal of special pay is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to restore the special pay to which petitioner is entitled in Head Cashier category with effect from 15.12.1995 with all consequential benefits. It appears, petitioner while working as Head Cashier at Gummannapadu branch, Guntur district was proceeded with departmentally for certain misconduct and as many as five charges were framed against him vide proceedings dt 25.6.2002. The said charges read as under: 1. Majority of customers expressed that ‘Head Cashier’ is indulging in snatching away notes from the packets while receiving and paying cash. 2. Head Cashier is not sincere and causes inconvenience to customers and staff with his misbehaviour. 3. Threatening or blackmailing high value depositors by disclosing their balances to Income Tax authorities. 4. Filing petition/suit against the Bank Management on flimsy grounds. 5. Harassing the customers with his threats to disclose/reveal the balances of their accounts. Further, the charge of unauthorized absence of 260 days was also alleged against the petitioner. After conducting enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted a report holding that except the first charge with regard to receiving short amounts, all the charges are proved. The disciplinary authority on consideration of the matter, has imposed punishment of withdrawal of special pay forever. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the appellate authority and since the appellate authority was not passing any orders, the present writ petition is filed. It appears, after filing the writ petition, the appellate authority refused to interfere with the order passed by the disciplinary authority and dismissed the appeal. As noticed above, the first charge is not proved and it appears, during the pendency of appeal, the period of absence was treated as extraordinary leave by order dated 27.4.2004 and practically the only charge against petitioner was that he was attending the office with some delay. Thus, the proceedings dt.27.4.2004 treating the unauthorized absence of the petitioner as extraordinary leave, seems to have not been taken into consideration by the Appellate Authority, while disposing of the appeal. Hence, the matter requires to be reconsidered by the appellate authority. Under those circumstances, the impugned order dated 20.1.2004 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority- General Manager (Operations), State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad for reconsideration of the entire issue and passing appropriate orders, as per law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 29.1.2008 Note: Registry is directed to mark copy of this Order to the General Manager (Operations), State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad B/o DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.6503 of 2005 29.1.2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.No.6503 of 2005 Date: 29th January, 2008 Between: V.Venkata Ramaiah .. Petitioner And State Bank of Hyderabd, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad, rep. by its General Manager (Operations) & another. .. Respondents