THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.11557 OF 1997 DATED: 19-07-2006 R.Krishna Murthy. ...PETITIONER AND The Andhra Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd., A.C.Guards, Rep., by its Vice Chairman& Managing Director. …RESPONDENT ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent, in holding the petitioner responsible for third party trade debts for a sum of Rs.47.51 lakhs and to recover Rs.1,34,070/- to start with @ Rs.1500/- per month with effect from October, 1996 in proceedings No.Pers/DM/JM/100958/96 dated 01-04- 1997 and further holding him responsible for a sum of Rs.3439.20ps in terms of proceedings No.Pers/AM(P) III/JM(DC)/2052-A/92-93, dated 04-11-1996 and ordering recovery from his salary at the rate of Rs.500/- per month commencing from the month of April, 1997, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the standing counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. It is stated that the petitioner while working as a Regional Manager, Chittoor in the respondent corporation advanced fertilizers and pesticides to different agricultural organizations amounting to Rs.48.75 lakhs out of which only an amount of Rs.1.21 lakhs were collected and the balance amounts to be collected are 47.51 lakhs and for non-collection of the said dues the petitioner is only responsible and since the public funds utilized in an irresponsible manner it was decided to recover Rs.1,34,070/- from the salary of the petitioner @ Rs.1500/- per month from October, 1996. Earlier to the said proceedings, proceedings, dated 04-11-1996, was issued stating that one J. Seshaiah, Senior Assistant (Stores) and V.Ramachandrareddy, Jamedar, were only responsible for the theft that has taken place at the Agro Service Centre, Kadapa worth of which was Rs.18,439-20ps and though the petitioner was not directly responsible but he had a responsibility to supervise the Agro Service Centre under his control and therefore, an amount of Rs.3439.20ps is also sought to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner. Questioning both the orders this Writ Petition has been filed on various grounds. 4. Though the Writ Petition has been filed and admitted on 11-06-1997 and interim stay of recovery of further amounts pursuant to the impugned orders dated 01-04-1997 and 04-11-1997 was granted, but no counter has been filed so far rebutting any of the allegations made in the Writ Petition. Admittedly, the said impugned orders have been passed without giving any show cause notice and without making any enquiry. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the said orders are violative of the principles of natural justice as well as service regulations. Without fixing any responsibility or framing any charges and without conducting any departmental enquiry against the petitioner the impugned proceedings issued for recovery of Rs.1,34,070/- and Rs.3439.20ps are illegal and arbitrary. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and as the averments made in the Writ Petition are not controverted I am of the opinion that the said orders cannot be sustained. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. However, it is open for the respondent to conduct an enquiry and fix the responsibility for taking appropriate action in accordance with law. No costs. ___________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 19th July, 2006 tsy