IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 24015 of 2006 Between: 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep by Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, A.P. Secretariat Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Town and Country Planning, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissionerof Enquires, General Administration Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Sri. P. Venkat Rao (Retd.) Dy City Planner R/o D. No. 1-4-880/20/17 New Bakaram, Gandhi Nagar 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 an appropriate Writ or direction more particularly one inthe nature of Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to and connected with order dt 9-12-2005 in O.A. No. 131/2004 on the file fo the Hon'ble A.P.A.T., Hyderabad and to quash or set- aside the same by holding as erroneous andcontrary to law to and pass such order or orders the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper inthe circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 24015 of 2006 Oral Order : ( Per Sri CVR, J ) This Writ Petition is directed against an order dated 9.12.2005 made in O.A.No.131 of 2004 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, whereunder the application filed by the respondent was allowed setting aside the impugned charge memo No.1475/B2/94-B, dated 11.12.1995. It was the case of the respondent-applicant that with regard to some irregularities relating to the period from 1991-95, charge memo no.147/B2/94-B, dated 11.12.1995 was issued and thereafter nothing has happened. The respondent-applicant, on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from service on 31-8-2003. When the officials were trying to inquire into the matter after his retirement, the present O.A. was filed stating that the alleged mis- conduct relates to the year 1991-1995. Though the charge sheet was issued on 11-12-1995, nothing has happened till he retired from service, and therefore it cannot be said that the charges are still surviving and he can be proceeded with departmentally. This contention of the respondent-applicant was accepted by the Tribunal holding that the petitioners herein have committed inordinate delay in conducting disciplinary proceedings and eventually caused prejudice to the respondent-applicant. Moreover, from the perusal of the charges, it was observed by the Tribunal that the allegations pertain to non-detection of certain violation of building regulations by the persons who sought permission to construct houses. The chares are not so complicated so as to consume lot of time. The lethargic attitude of the respondents has unnecessarily caused mental agony of the respondent-applicant, and in those circumstances, the impugned charge memo was set aside. We have given an earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned order. As noticed above, the Tribunal has not committed any error in passing the impugned order calling for interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, we are not inclined to interfere with such a reasoned order passed by the Tribunal. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________ GM, J _________________ CVR, J Dt: 23-6-2008 Kk