IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT:: HYDERABAD. WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY W.P.No.25014 of 2010 Between:- The Principal Secretary to Government of A.P., Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Department Secretari, Hyderabad & 4 others …Petitioners A n d M.Ch. Subba Rao & another …Respondents HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY W.P.No.25014 OF 2010 ORDER: (Per TMK,J) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking Writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to the order dated 18.11.2009 passed in OA No.7547 of 2006 by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and quash the same as being erroneous, illegal and unreasonable. 2. The first respondent herein filed OA No.7547 of 2006 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, seeking to set aside G.O.Rt.No.1100, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (Vig.II) Department, dated 07.08.2006, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the enquiry report dated 11.06.2006. 3. According to the first respondent herein, who is the applicant in O.A., while working as Assistant Engineer, he was kept under suspension with effect from 15.10.1996 by the second petitioner herein on the allegation of misappropriation of EAS funds. While the applicant was continuing under suspension, he was allowed to retire from service on 31.08.1997 on attaining the age of superannuation. Earlier, fourth petitioner herein issued charge memo to the applicant on 08.10.1995 and the applicant submitted his explanation. Charges were framed on the basis of the preliminary enquiry report. Later, the applicant filed OA No.4443 of 1997 praying to set aside the suspension order and the said OA was disposed of on 23.01.2002 directing the second petitioner herein to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of three months and further directed to regulate the period of suspension in terms of F.R. so as to facilitate the release and disbursement of retirement benefits of the applicant in accordance with rules. Since the petitioners herein have not taken any steps for implementing the orders of the Tribunal, the applicant filed contempt application and on the submissions made by the Government Pleader, the contempt application was closed. The petitioners, instead of finalizing the disciplinary proceedings, have initiated criminal case in CC No.18 of 2004 against the applicant and another. The second petitioner herein issued charge memo on 14.11.2000, for which the applicant submitted an explanation. The enquiry officer proceeded with the enquiry basing on the preliminary enquiry report submitted by the Superintending Engineer in the year 1996. No witnesses relating to the charge were examined and the enquiry officer came to the conclusion that the applicant is responsible for misappropriation of Government EAS funds to a tune of Rs.24.59 lakhs along with another. 4. The respondents filed counter denying the allegations made in the application and contended that the Tribunal directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of three months and also to regulate the suspension period in terms of F.R. After completing the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted a report and after examining the same, a show cause notice was issued to the applicant on 27.06.2005 for imposing punishment. The applicant made a representation requesting to accord permission to submit explanation to the show cause notice by 31.07.2006 and accordingly permission was accorded, but the applicant failed to submit his explanation in time. As it was found that the applicant and another are equally responsible for misappropriation of Rs.24.59 lakhs, responsibility was fixed on the applicant for 50% of the misappropriated amount, which comes to Rs.12,29,550/-. The Government issued order dated 07.08.2006 imposing punishment of withholding the entire pension and gratuity of the applicant, besides recovery of Rs.12,29,550/- from the applicant towards loss caused to the Government after following the procedure under the CCA rules. 5. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. and set aside the orders in G.O.Rt.No.1100 and the remitted the matter back to the respondents therein to conduct a fresh enquiry through the enquiry officer by examining the witnesses and giving opportunity to the applicant to cross examine the witnesses and to examine witnesses and mark documents on his behalf and that the enquiry shall be conducted as per the procedure laid down in Rule 20 of the A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1991. Aggrieved by the said order, the government filed the present writ petition to set aside the orders of the Tribunal. 6. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-II and perused the record. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II contended that the Tribunal erred in setting aside the well-reasoned and well-considered order of the Government without displacing the reasons mentioned therein. The Tribunal ought to have seen that the enquiry Officer has followed the provisions of Rule 20 of APCS (CC&A) Rules 1991. He further contended that without exhausting the available remedial measures, the first respondent filed O.A. the order of the Tribunal 8. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the Tribunal allowed the O.A.No.7547 of 2006 and remitted back the matter to the petitioners herein to conduct a fresh enquiry through the enquiry officer by examining the witnesses and giving opportunity to the applicant to cross examine the witnesses and to examine witnesses and mark documents on his behalf and that the enquiry shall be conducted as per the procedure laid down in Rule 20 of A.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1991. We do not see any illegality or irregularity in the order of the tribunal warranting interference and writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J Dated 06th October 2010 ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Lrkm/bss