THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.4728 of 2000 Dated: 12-02-2008 Between : A. Subba Rao (died per LRs.), Smt. A. Sita Devi and another. … Petitioner/s And The Commissioner of Agriculture, Andhra Pradesh, Fateh Maidan, Hyderbad-50001 and another. … Respondent/s THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.4728 of 2000 ORAL ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents. 2. This Writ of Certiorari is filed seeking to quash the order, dated 13-12-1999, in O.A.No.3189 of 1992, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’), whereby and whereunder the Tribunal directed the respondents to complete the enquiry and pass final orders in the enquiry and take further action in accordance with the final orders to be passed in the second enquiry. 3. The facts, in brief, are as under:- The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in the respondents Department. While he was working as Depot Clerk, Kosigi in Adoni Taluk, Kurnool District, a charge sheet was issued on 19-08-1970, alleging certain irregularities and after following necessary formalities, final order, dated 28-06-1976, has been passed by the respondents dismissing him from service. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed R.P.No.454 of 1978 and the same was allowed by the erstwhile Tribunal, by order, dated 08-02-1980. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner was reinstated into service. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Agriculture, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, first respondent herein, through proceedings No.Estt.IV(4)/1488/76, dated 01-06-1981, proposed to conduct a fresh enquiry and appointed the Joint Director of Agriculture, Kurnool, second respondent herein, as Enquiry Officer. Subsequently, the services of the petitioner were regularized from the date of suspension till the date of reinstatement, treating the same as ‘duty’ and he was paid the arrears of salary and other benefits. 4. While so, another charge sheet in Memo. No.QOC.A2/2512/81, dated 10-05-1992, was issued by second respondent herein, framing the identical charges which were framed and enquired into earlier with regard to the alleged irregularities said to have been committed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of filing O.A.No.3189 of 1992. 5. The Tribunal, having considered the material available on record, by order, dated 13-12-1999, disposed of the O.A., directing the respondents to complete the enquiry and pass final orders. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 6. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died on 31-05-2003 and his legal representatives were brought on record. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the contents of second charge sheet, dated 10-05-1992, are quite identical which were framed and enquired into earlier in the charge sheet, dated 19-08-1970. He also contended that though the Tribunal disposed of the O.A., directing the respondents to complete the enquiry within a period of four months, so far no such enquiry has been initiated, nor could be completed in view of the death of the charged officer. 8. Admittedly, pursuant to the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, directing the competent authority to complete the enquiry, expeditiously, no enquiry, whatsoever, has been conducted so far, nor there was any progress in the enquiry. Therefore, except the issuance of the charge sheet, dated 10-05- 1992, there was nothing on record to show that there was any sort of enquiry conducted pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal. 9. The law is well settled that there cannot be any enquiry against a dead person. Notwithstanding the magnitude of the charges levelled against the deceased-petitioner and owing to the long pendency of the charge sheet unenquired – may be, by virtue of the judicial interference, virtually, no enquiry had been conducted. Perhaps, it would be proper to say that no enquiry could be conducted so far. Whatever may be the reason, the eventual consequence that followed is the death of the charged officer without conducting any enquiry. In such a case, we are of the view that the sin goes with the person. 10. However, we are of the view that had the charged officer been alive and the enquiry was conducted, and pending passing of the final orders, if the charged officer dies, there could have been a possibility of inflicting the penalty, which may reflect in the retiral benefits, like Family Pension, Death cum Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) etc. Even that is not the situation in the instant case. 11. In the instant case, since the petitioner is not alive, it is difficult to conduct any enquiry and impose penalty against him and the disciplinary proceedings so conducted would remain undefended by the charged officer, which, in our considered view is totally irrational. We are of the further view that any eventual penalty imposed would cause substantial and irreparable loss to the legal representatives of the deceased-petitioner, who were brought on record. 12. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is liable to the set aside. 13. In the result, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 13-12-1999, in O.A.No.3189 of 1992 and the respondents are directed to settle the terminal benefits, to which the legal representatives of the petitioner are entitled to consequent upon the death of the petitioner, with utmost expedition, in view of the fact reported to this Court that the wife of the deceased had been suffering from the serious ailment of cancer, in any event not beyond the period of 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 12-02-2008 Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.4728 of 2000 12-02-2008 (Msr)