HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos. 16145 & 16176 OF 2009 DATED 10TH FEBRUARY, 2010. BETWEEN The Commissioner of Panchayat Raj Department, Govt. of AP, Hyderabad and anr …Petitioners in both Writ Petitions And P. Prathap Reddy ….Respondent in WP.No.16145/2009 K.Kurmaiah …..Respondent in WP.No.16176/2009 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos. 16145 & 16176 OF 2009: COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The Commissioner of Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, and, the District Collector, Mahaboobnagar District, question the order dated 4.2.2009 passed in O.A. No. 1558 of 2009 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, granting interim suspension of G.O.Rt.Nos. 56 and 57, both dated 9.1.2009 and consequential proceedings thereon and directing reinstatement of the respondents/applicants. Inasmuch as the factual and legal aspects involved in both Writ Petitions are one and the same, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, we narrate the factual situation in W.P.No. 16145 of 2009. The respondent/applicant ﬁled O.A.No. 1558 of 2009 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, questioning G.O.Rt.No. 56, dated 9.1.2009, conﬁrming proceedings No. B1/885/2006-A6-2 of the second petitioner-District Collector dated 23.6.2008, and consequential proceedings issued thereon vide No.B1/835/2006-A6-2, dated 24.1.2009 dismissing the respondent/applicant from service besides directing recovery of Rs.3,10,236/- (cost of 475 quintals of rice) as illegal and arbitrary. The Tribunal by ex parte order dated 4.2.2009 granted interim relief suspending the aforesaid orders and directing the petitioners herein to reinstate the respondent/applicant into service. Questioning the said order, the present Writ Petition is filed. While admitting the said Writ petition on 7.8.2009 we expressed that normally when the dismissal order is questioned, the grant of interim relief by suspending the same would amount to allowing of the main relief itself and therefore the suspension of the order of dismissal by the Tribunal is totally unjustiﬁed. Accordingly, we suspended the interim order dated 4.2.2009 granted by the Tribunal. Thereafter, the petitioners herein ﬁled V.M.A.No. 1073 of 2009 before the Tribunal for vacation of the interim order dated 4.2.2009. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing on either aside at the interlocutory stage. The District Collector, Mahaboobnagar, after conducting regular enquiry and giving reasonable opportunity passed the order in proceedings No. B1/885/2006-A6-2, dated 23.6.2008 dismissing the respondent/applicant from service besides ordering recovery of an amount of Rs.3,10,236/- being the loss caused to the Government. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent/applicant preferred an appeal before the Government and the Government vide order dated 23.7.2008 while calling for report from the District Collector, stayed the order of dismissal passed by the District Collector, dated 23.6.2008. Pursuant to the same, the District Collector implemented the order of the Government dated 23.7.2008 by reinstating the respondent/applicant into service vide proceedings No.B1/835/2006.A6, dated 21.8.2008. Thereafter, the Government heard the appeal ﬁnally preferred by the respondent/applicant and dismissed the same by upholding the order of the District Collector dated 23.6.2008 vide G.O. Rt.No. 56, dated 9.1.2009 and vacated the interim order granted by it earlier on 23.7.2008. Questioning the said Government Order, the respondent ﬁled OA before the Tribunal and obtained ex parte order of interim suspension. We are of the opinion that in cases of like this, where an employee was dismissed from service after conducting regular enquiry and aﬀording reasonable opportunity, which order is conﬁrmed by the appellate authority-Government, it is not just and proper to suspend such order and give positive direction for reinstatement into service. It is not the case of the petitioner that the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority as conﬁrmed by the Appellate Authority- Government is without jurisdiction and non est in law. No reasons have been recorded by the Tribunal while granting suspension and such positive direction of reinstatement into service. The learned Government Pleader submitted that to vacate the interim order granted by the Tribunal, the Government has already ﬁled vacate stay petition vide VMA.No.1073 of 2009 on 18.6.2009. During the pendency of the said VMA, the respondent/applicant ﬁled Contempt Application before the Tribunal, in which, notice was ordered. Prima facie we are of the opinion that granting of interim suspension by the Tribunal, stated supra, is illegal, invalid and unsustainable. For the foregoing discussion, the interim order dated 4.2.2009 passed in O.A.No. 1558 of 2009 by the Tribunal is set aside. The Writ Petitions are accordingly allowed. However, we request the Tribunal to dispose of the main OAs as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, uninﬂuenced by any of the observations made in this order. No order as to costs. ------------------------------------ JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH -------------------------------------------------- JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR DATED 10T H FEBRUARY, 2010. MSNR.