IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH 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 : 14470 of 2008 Between: 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Transport, Roads & Buildings Department, Secratariat, Hyderabad-22. 2 The Engineer-in-Chief, R & B Administration, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND L.V.S. Murthy, Deputy Executive Engineer (Retd.), R/o. Chinchinada, Elamanchili Mandal, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT 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 to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling for the records relating to the order passed in O.A.No.688 of 2004 dated 08.11.2005 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.14470 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the order dated 08-11-2005 passed in O.A.No.688 of 2004 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The respondent herein is the applicant in the above O.A. while the petitioners herein are the respondents. The misconduct alleged against the applicant is that he had taken measurements based on pits instead of levels at the time of excavation of the earth for road widening in R&B Sub-Division, Gudivada. On the basis of report of Vigilance and Enforcement Department, a charge memo was issued to the applicant to which he submitted explanation denying the charges. Then, the matter was entrusted to the Commissioner of Inquiries. A show cause notice was issued and the applicant filed his reply. The authority after considering the material on record imposed the penalty of 5% cut in the pension permanently. The applicant filed the above O.A. challenging the penalty imposed. The Tribunal, on perusal of the record pertaining to the case, set aside G.O.Ms.No.210, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Ser.1.2) Department dated 21-11- 2003 imposing the said penalty. Hence, this writ petition is filed by official respondents. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader for petitioners and perused the record. 4. At the outset, it is to be noted that the Tribunal perused the report of the Enquiry Officer whose opinion was recorded as follows: ‘One point is that the agreement itself is reported to be defective and thus has facilitated the course of action by failed staff and payments to contractor.’ Further, another official by name K.V.Bhaskara Rao, AEE (R & B) had also faced similar allegations in respect of the same work, in addition to other works. After due enquiry and compliance of procedure, he was inflicted with the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect for negligence and dereliction of duty. Whereas, the applicant was inflicted with the punishment of 5% cut in the pension permanently. In fact, the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.996 Transport, Roads & Builindgs (Vig.I.1) Department, dated 17-11-2004, had decided to drop further action against the said K.V.Bhaskara Rao. Thus, the authorities have imposed different penalties for the two delinquent officials who have faced the same charges in the enquiry and are similarly situated. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal has rightly set aside G.O., and are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of the powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 08-07-2008 bsc