IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2706 of 2000 Between: 1 Secretary to Govt. Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Dept. A.P., Hyderabad 2 Commissioner of Panchayat Raj & Rural Employment A.P.Hyderabad 3 District Collector Krishna District at Machilipatnam ... PETITIONERS AND 1 S.Jagannadha Rao retired former Divisional Panchayat Officer Vijayawada 2 The Registrar APAT, 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 an order, direct or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari and quash the orders passed by Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA.No.112/93, Dt.16/06/1999 and declared the same as null and void and against the principle of law and justice and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2706 of 2000 ORAL ORDER: (per HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition is ﬁled seeking to quash the Order dated 16-6-1999 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.112 of 1993. Respondent No.1 herein ﬁled the above O.A. challenging the Proceedings dated 21- 12-1992 issued by the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, placing him under suspension, pending enquiry into certain alleged irregularities said to have been committed by him. Before the Tribunal, no counter was ﬁled by the petitioners herein. It appears, during the pendency of the O.A., the 1st respondent herein-applicant retired from service on 30-4-1993. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal disposed of the O.A. holding that if the petitioners herein have not passed any ﬁnal orders in the disciplinary proceedings and if they did not pursue the matter further, they shall pass ﬁnal orders in accordance with rules and merits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order and after necessary orders are passed, if the retirement beneﬁts to which the applicant-1st respondent herein is eligible under the rules have not been disbursed to him, petitioners herein shall disburse the same, as expeditiously as possible. Challenging the said Order, the Government has filed this Writ Petition. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners contended that the Tribunal went beyond the prayer in the O.A., which was ﬁled challenging the suspension order and granted a direction to pay retirement beneﬁts to the 1st respondent, which is illegal. Further, the Government vide Order dated 23-10-1999 have requested the Director General, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Hyderabad to take steps for prosecuting the 1st respondent along with others and, therefore, it is not possible to release all pensionary benefits to the 1st respondent. Admittedly, no counter was ﬁled by the petitioners herein before the Tribunal. Respondent No.1 was suspended from service in the year 1992 and the said Order was challenged in the year 1993 before the Tribunal. While admitting the O.A., on 19-1-1993, the Tribunal passed an interim order directing that the representation said to have been made by the applicant-1st respondent herein to the Government be disposed of irrespective of pendency of the O.A. Thereafter, the O.A. had come up for hearing in June,1999. Till that time, no counter was ﬁled by the petitioners herein. In the meanwhile, on 30-4-1993, the 1st respondent retired from service. Under those circumstances, the Tribunal disposed of the O.A. holding that if the petitioners herein have not passed any ﬁnal orders in the disciplinary proceedings and if they did not pursue the matter further, they shall pass ﬁnal orders in accordance with rules and merits within a period of three months and after necessary orders are passed, if the retirement beneﬁts to which the applicant-1st respondent herein is eligible under the rules have not been disbursed to him, petitioners herein shall disburse the same, as expeditiously as possible. The Order dated 23-10-1999 said to have been passed by the authorities seeking to prosecute the 1st respondent herein was subsequent to the Order passed by the O.A. We do not ﬁnd any inﬁrmity in the said Order of the Tribunal, warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition fails and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED, J) 24th July, 2008 ________________ (C.V. RAMULU,J) prk