THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.1363 of 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) While the 1st respondent was working as Deputy Director, District Treasury, Ananthapur, enquiry has been initiated and two charges were framed against him vide G.O.Rt.No.2816, dated 16-12-1999, which reads as follows:- “CHARGE-I: Sri S.V.Subbanna, Deputy Director (Retd.) while functioning as Deputy Director, District Treasury, Ananthapur, during the period 1996 had appointed Sri S.Raghavendra, son of Late Sri Sankaranarayana a deceased employee of treasury unit of Anantapur, though as on the date of death of the employee i.e., 18- 09-1995, the spouse of the deceased and the mother of Sri S.Raghavendra was employed as a Special Grade Assistant in Guild of Service Elementary School, Anantapur and subsequently retired voluntarily on 06-08-1996 and the appointment is irregular as the candidate, Mr.S.Raghavendra is not eligible.” “CHARGE-II : That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Sri S.V.Subbanna, retired Deputy Director had irregularly appointed Smt.M.R.Bhuvaneswari, in the special drive for filling up back-log vacancies of SCs as Junior Accountant, although she did not possess the typewriting qualification, which was one of the qualifications required to hold the post of Junior Accountant and issued conditional appointment orders for which there is no provision in the rules, and that he has failed to follow the instructions contained in G.O.Ms.No.275, Finance and Planning (FW.Admn.I) Department, dated 01-06-1990.” Insofar as the 1st charge is concerned, the Enquiry Officer has exonerated the 1st respondent-applicant. Insofar as the 2nd charge is concerned, the Enquiry Officer held that the said charge is partly proved and accordingly, the disciplinary authority imposed punishment of withholding of 10% pension for a period of three years vide G.O.Rt.No.2958, dated 02-07-2005, against which, the 1st respondent filed a review petition and the same was dismissed vide Memo, dated 08-05-2006. Aggrieved by the same, the 1st respondent-applicant filed O.A.No.6091 of 2007 before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order, dated 21-08-2009, allowed the said O.A setting aside the order of punishment. Aggrieved by the same, the Government has filed the present writ petition. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. A perusal of the record goes to show that the District Selection Committee is the selection authority consisting of the District Collector as its Chairman and an officer not lower in rank than that of Deputy Director of Treasuries and Accounts/District Treasury Officer. The selection committee after selecting Smt.M.R.Bhuvaneswari as Junior Accountant, directed the Deputy Director, District Treasury, Ananthapur, to give posting orders vide proceedings Rc.No.A3/8348/95, dated 27-06-1996. Pursuant to the said proceedings, Smt.G.L.Ratnamma, Deputy Director (Full Additional Charge) of District Treasury, Ananthapur, issued orders appointing the said M.R.Bhuvaneswari as Junior Accountant and posted to Sub-Treasury, Kambadur, vide proceedings dated 08-07-1996, while the 1st respondent was on leave. But, the said M.R.Bhuvaneswari has not joined duty at Sub- Treasury, Kambadur. It appears, on 30-07-1996, M.R.Bhuvaneswari has approached the 1st respondent-applicant and requested to give posting orders at the District Treasury, Anantapur. Accordingly, the 1st respondent-applicant issued revised appointment orders, dated 01-08-1996, appointing her as Junior Accountant and posted to District Treasury, Anantapur, in modification of the earlier orders issued by Smt.G.L.Ratnamma. Charge No.2 is that the 1st respondent-applicant irregularly appointed M.R.Bhuvaneswari in the special drive for filing up backlog vacancies of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as Junior Accountant, although she did not possess typewriting qualification, which was one of the qualifications required to hold the post of Junior Accountant, and issued conditional appointment orders, for which, there is no provision in the rules, and that he has failed to follow the instructions issued in G.O.Ms.No.275, dated 01-06- 1990. We are of the opinion that if the said M.R.Bhuvaneswari is not entitled to be appointed as Junior Accountant, it is for the Selection Committee to reject her case for appointment. In fact, Smt.G.L.Ratnamma, Deputy Director (Full Additional Charge) of District Treasury, Ananthapur, appointed the said M.R.Bhuvaneshwari vide proceedings, dated 08-07-1996, pursuant to the order of the Selection Committee and the 1st respondent-applicant merely changed the place of posting. Therefore, framing of 2nd charge that the 1st respondent-applicant appointed the said Bhuvaneshwari irregularly is not tenable. Further, the Tribunal has observed that no action has been taken against the said Smt.G.L.Ratnamma, who gave the first appointment order, pursuant to the orders of the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee has not at all been found fault with for selecting the said M.R.Buvaneshwari. In fact, the Government issued Memo, dated 14-04-2003, regularizing the services of the said Buvaneshwari as Junior Accountant, who was appointed in the backlog vacancies of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Therefore, it cannot be said that the said irregularity is attributable to the 1st respondent-applicant. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any error committed by the Tribunal in allowing the said application filed by the 1st respondent herein. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dated: 29-01-2010 Prv