APHC010194812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO: 9814/2025 Between: P V Ramana Murthy The Union Of India and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P A SESHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT PETITION NO: 9814/2025 AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3527] THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 HBKM,J & AHHS,J W.P.No.9814 of 2025 The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the order passed in O.A.No.853 of 2019 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, dated 20.01.2025, dismissing the OA as pre-mature. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent issued the proceedings, dated 06.09.2019 directing the petitioner to make a representation on the penalty proposed within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said memorandum, dated 06.09.2019. 4. It reads that the petitioner has been convicted by the II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam, vide orders, dated 31.07.2019 in C.C.No.06 of 2013 by awarding a penalty to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- along with other incidental sentences for the charge under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. As the said respondent was authorized to exercise the statutory powers, as per the Directorate memo, dated 03.09.2019, the said authority proposed to award an appropriate 3 HBKM,J & AHHS,J W.P.No.9814 of 2025 penalty under Rule-19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, taking into account the gravity of the criminal charges. 5. It further reads that the 2nd respondent came to a conclusion that the petitioner is not a fit person to be retained in service, in view of the gravity of the charge. For which, there was an imposition of punishment by the competent authority and accordingly, proposed to impose the penalty of dismissal from service. But, however, the petitioner was given an opportunity to make a representation under the said impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.09.2019, as stated above. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court was carried in appeal before the Hon’ble High Court in Criminal Appeal No.658 of 2019, wherein, there was an interim order of suspending the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases at Visakhapatnam in C.C.No.06 of 2013 and the petitioner was enlarged on bail vide its order, dated 08.08.2019 and the said appeal is still pending before this Court. He strenuously contends that, when the imposition of sentence is stayed by the appellate Court, the 2nd respondent cannot proceed with the impugned proceedings, dated 06.09.2019 by calling for submission 4 HBKM,J & AHHS,J W.P.No.9814 of 2025 of representation by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the impugned proceedings, dated 06.09.2019, the petitioner approached the Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.853 of 2019, which was dismissed as pre-mature vide its order, dated 20.01.2025, specifically observing that the petitioner has not submitted any representation to the above said impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.09.2019. It enabled the petitioner to give a detailed representation for the said impugned proceedings and accordingly it was observed that the OA is pre-mature. 7. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondents also submits that, as there was no representation at all by the petitioner to the above said impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.09.2019, the Tribunal is right enough to uphold that it is a pre-mature application before it. He further contends that, even if representation is made now by the petitioner, the same will be considered by the authorities concerned in accordance with law. 8. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially a brief representation dated 09.10.2019 was given and later on, a detailed representation was given to the 2nd respondent, which is undated, but, was enclosed as material paper in this Writ Petition. 5 HBKM,J & AHHS,J W.P.No.9814 of 2025 9. As a rejoinder, the learned Deputy Solicitor General also points out that, even the said detailed representation is much subsequent to the filing of the above said OA before the Tribunal. Hence, it shall be treated as an afterthought. 10. In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon consideration of the rival submissions made and upon perusal of the order of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the petitioner has to make a detailed representation for the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent, as it does not ex facie disclose any penal consequences at this stage and as a matter of giving an opportunity for the petitioner, the submission of the representation by the petitioner is facilitated by the 2nd respondent in the said impugned proceedings, dated 06.09.2019. 11. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to submit a detailed representation to the above said impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent, dated 06.09.2019 enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order and upon receipt of the same, the 2nd respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law by communicating the same to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. 6 HBKM,J & AHHS,J W.P.No.9814 of 2025 12. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN _________________________________ JUSTICE A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA 17.04.2025 MDP