IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 1059 of 2002 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 20/03/2002 in WP NO : 15143 OF 1992 on the file of the High Court.) Between: G.Manoharan S/o.S.K.Gopalakrishnan R/o.New No.98 Old No.14,Thirupalli Street Chennai ..... APPELLANT AND 1 Bank of Maharastra Lok Mangal, 1501 Shivaji Nagar,Pune rep.by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director 2 The Appellate Authority-cum-Asst.General Manager Bank of Maharastra South Zonal Office 3 The Regional Station Road, Basavangudi, Bangalore Regional Office, Hyderabad Region, 1-7-379 Bank Street Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.V.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.SRINIVASA RAO The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri AGR,J) Writ appellant ﬁled the Writ Petition challenging the order of the disciplinary authority i.e. the third respondent herein dated 25.05.1989 removing him from service on the proved charges of misconduct and as conﬁrmed by the appellate authority i.e. the second respondent herein in his proceedings in Reference No.AX27/SZO/PERS/K-9999/90 dated 30.08.1990 as arbitrary and illegal and for a consequential direction to reinstate him into service as Middle Management Grade Scale I Officer with full back wages and other benefits. 2 Learned single Judge allowed the Writ Petition and remitted the matter to the appellate authority to re-examine and reconsider the matter afresh after aﬀording a personal hearing to the appellant and rely upon the material placed before the appellate authority and also directed to deal with the matter afresh on merits taking into account the principles enunciated and in accordance with Rule 17 (i) and (ii) of the Bank of Maharashtra Oﬃcer Employees’ (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 3 Since the matter was simply remitted to the appellate authority for reconsideration without granting the relief claimed by the petitioner, the present writ appeal has been ﬁled questioning the order passed by the learned single Judge. 4 When the writ appeal is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in the writ petition, a notice dated 03.06.2002 was issued to the petitioner for his appearance for which he sent a reply dated 11.06.2002 stating that in view of the ﬁling of the writ appeal and as he was awaiting the outcome of the same, he was unable to appear before the appellate authority personally. Since the appellant failed to appear before it, the appellate authority, by the order dated 20.06.2002 conﬁrmed the earlier order passed and dismissed the appeal vide his proceedings dated 20.06.2002. Since the said order has not been challenged by the appellant, learned counsel for the appellant requested that it is agreeable for the appellant to appear before the appellate authority on a date speciﬁed by the appellate authority and to put forward his claim, so that a reasoned order can be passed by the appellate authority after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant, and did not press the other grounds of appeal. In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent has reported no objection for providing the opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant once again. 5 In the above circumstances, since the appeal ﬁled by the appellant is sub judice before this Court, the order passed by the appellate authority dated 20.06.2002 dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order passed by the disciplinary authority is set aside. 6 In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, we dispose of this appeal directing the appellate authority to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant by ﬁxing a date for his appearance and to dispose of the appeal preferred by the appellant as directed by the leaned single Judge after hearing both sides. No order as to costs. -------------------------------------- JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY ------------------------------------------------- JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 02.09.2008 kvsn ........REGISTRAR To 1. 2.2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WA { } THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 1059 of 2002 02.09.2008 Kvsn