IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.18202 of 2009 Between: M. Eswara Rao, S/o. M. Ranganayakulu, I & CAD, Irrigation Circle, Anantapur. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, I & CAD Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad -500 022. 2 The Engineer-in-Chief, I & CAD (Administration Wing), Erram Manzil, Jalasoudha Buildings, A.P., Hyderabad - 500 082. .....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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularlyj one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in issuing the impugned G.O.Rt.No. 1310, I & CAD (Ser.VII V&E-2) Dept., dt. 03-8-2009 and dismissal of O.A.No. 9125 of 2009 (O.A.Nos. 9122 of 2009 and batch), dated 19-8-2009 passed by the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad as arbitrary, illegal and set aside the same Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.SATYAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.18202 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) Petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the common order in O.A.9122/2009 and batch, whereunder the batch was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) under its order dated 19.08.2009. Petitioner herein is the applicant in O.A.9125/2009 from among the batch of the O.As, referred to above. The main order which is the subject matter of O.As, referred to above, is G.O.Rt.No.1310 Irrigation & CAD (Ser.VII (V&E-2)) Department dated 03.08.2009, under which disciplinary proceedings were contemplated by the Government against the petitioner. The Government was satisfied that the petitioner who is now working as Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Anantapur committed certain serious irregularities and corruption in procurement of Screw Gearing Shutters under Vamsadhara Project of Srikakulam District, and under exercise of powers under Rule-8(1) of A.P.Civil Services (CCA) Rules 1991, the Government placed the petitioner under suspension pending conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. The aforesaid order is questioned by the petitioner in the said O.A. In the batch of the aforesaid O.As, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions submitted before the Tribunal that the irregularities alleged to have been committed by 33 Engineers including the petitioners herein were so grave in nature and they have caused huge loss to the Government to the tune of Rs.55 crores and the Government, therefore, kept all the Officers under suspension by passing separate orders in each case and disciplinary enquiry is under contemplation. Consequently, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the orders of suspension and dismissed the O.As. Challenging the aforesaid order, this writ petition is filed. We had earlier heard similar matters against the same common order in W.P.Nos.17751 and 17752 of 2009 and batch and by order dated 26.08.2009 we have dismissed the said writ petitions. In normal course, this writ petition would also be governed by the same order. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Satyam Reddy has made strenuous efforts to convince us that so far as the petitioner is concerned, this case stands on different footing and as against petitioner, there is hardly any allegation. He has brought to our notice that even according to the Government, the only allegation made against the petitioner is that he obtained erroneous rates from the General Superintendent, Seethanagaram. The learned counsel would also contend that from the counter affidavit filed and Vigilance Report produced as annexure along with the said counter affidavit, nothing is alleged against the petitioner herein and all the allegations of fraud, collusion etc. are made against other officers. He also submits that long before the impugned order of suspension is issued, the petitioner was already transferred on administrative grounds on 04.05.2006 and has been working far away from the Vamsadhara Circle where he was earlier Executive Engineer. The learned counsel would therefore submit that suspension of an officer against whom there is hardly any material is not at all warranted. He also submits that the petitioner is about to retire shortly and his suspension pending enquiry is completely unwarranted on the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned Government Pleader has filed a counter affidavit together with annexures which includes the Vigilance Report and statements of some officers said to have been recorded by the Government and the copies of letters and correspondence which was taken note of by the Vigilance Officer. The learned Government Pleader contends that the plea of the petitioner that he is now working at far of place and that he has no scope to interfere with the enquiry is incorrect in view of the fact that the irregularities allegedly committed are so grave, that the petitioner as well as 32 other officers are prima facie jointly and severally liable for the loss caused to the exchequer to the tune of over Rs.55 crores. The prima facie material, according to the learned Government Pleader, is such that the Government has reached a subjective satisfaction that the disciplinary enquiry against all the officers is warranted and all the officers are uniformly placed under suspension pending enquiry including the petitioner. He, therefore, submits that the Tribunal rightly declined to interfere with the suspension pending enquiry and this Court also would not interfere with the same. We have considered the aforesaid submissions, and on more than one occasion we have heard both the counsel with reference to the material placed in support of the respective pleas. It appears to us that the Government was satisfied with the Vigilance Report that an enormous fraud was committed by 33 Engineers including the petitioner which led to huge loss about Rs.55 crores to the exchequer. The allegations of falsification, fraud and collusion alleged to have been made against all the officers, as involvement of each officer and extent of participation and involvement etc. would to come to light only after a detailed enquiry. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out certain documents to convince us that there is hardly anything suggested against the petitioner, we are not in a position to presume the guilt or innocence of any officers at this stage. The enquiry is yet to be held and precise involvement of the officers would be known only thereafter. Since the suspension pending enquiry cannot be said to be a punishment and power of the Government to suspend being not questioned, we are of the view that the order of the Tribunal dismissing the O.As warrants no interference under our certiorari jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner shall have liberty to make such a representation before the Government for appropriate relief. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ___________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J Dated: 23.09.2009 Dsr