IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 20813 of 2007 Between: B.K. Pramod S/o.Late B.Krishnaiah R/o.20-51/5/A, Sharadanagar Colony, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 M/s. Abhyudaya Oriental Evening College (an aided Institution), rep. by its Correspondent, Jiaguda, Hyderabad. 2 Principal, M/s. Abhyudaya Oriental Evening College Jiaguda, Hyderabad. 3 Commissioner of Higher Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to duty and discharge his duties as LDC from February 2004, without finalizing the disciplinary action against him, is arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to pay the salary of the petitioner from February, 2004 up to the date of completion of the disciplinary enquiry and passing of final order in their disciplinary jurisdiction and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by B.K.Pramod with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to duty and discharge his duties as Lower Division Clerk from February 2004 without finalizing the disciplinary action against him, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner is a Lower Division Clerk in M/s.Abhyudaya Oriental Evening College (an aided institution)-first respondent. Disciplinary proceedings have been initiated for his unauthorized absence from 07.01.2005. Indeed, a charge memo was issued and thereupon, an explanation was submitted by the petitioner on 10.01.2005. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the first respondent is neither permitting him to report to duty nor concluding the departmental proceedings initiated against him. The first respondent filed counter-affidavit. Sri L.Narsing Rao has sworn to the counter-affidavit. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that the first respondent is prepared to permit the petitioner to report to duty subject to the disciplinary proceedings. Para ‘5’ of the counter-affidavit reads as under: “It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to salary from November, 2004 as claimed by him. The Disciplinary Proceedings could not be concluded as he did not report for duty all these years. As and when the petitioner reports for duty appropriate action will be taken.” Since the first respondent has stated in the counter- affidavit that he is prepared to permit the petitioner to report to duty, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to report to duty on or before 27.01.2009. It goes without saying that the petitioner is entitled for the salary from the date of his reporting to duty. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ (B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J) Dt:19.01.2009 kdl