1 APHC010600052018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 28496/2018 Between: M.rama Krishna ...PETITIONER AND A P State Housing Corporation Ltd and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N RANGA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. R KALYAN CHAKTAVARTHY The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…..to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Direction, declaring the action of Respondents in recovering an amount of Rs.58,000/- from the petitioner out of the gratuity amount paid to him, after a period of more than 3 years from the date of retirement, without conducting any enquiry and without affording opportunity to the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and to consequently set aside the Order dated 29.6.2015 in Rc.No.A2/2171/2015 on the file of the 2nd Respondent by further directing the Respondents to forthwith refund the said 2 amount of Rs.58,000/- to the petitioner with applicable rate of interest; Award costs, and pass such other or further orders …...” 2. Heard Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Standing Counsel for AP Housing Corporation, appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is retired in the year 2008. After three years, a show-cause notice was issued to him. The petitioner has submitted explanation. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent issued impugned proceedings for recovery of Rs.58,000/- in the year 2015, without any enquiry and behind back of the petitioner. Learned counsel finally submits that the petition may be allowed directing the respondent authorities to return the amount of Rs.58,000/- which is recovered without any enquiry from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents would submit that this amount of Rs.58,000/- was recovered from the pensionary benefits of the individual. On the request of the individual only, the proposals were submitted to the authorities for sanction of pensionary benefits after recovery of Rs.58,000/-. Learned Standing Counsel further placed on record the information submitted to the Managing Director, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, Vijayawada from the District Head-Housing, Prakasam District, dated 05.02.2024, wherein, there is a reference of enquiry which has 3 been initiated against the petitioner and the guilt of the petitioner is proved to the extent of Rs.58,000/- loss caused to the Corporation, due to misappropriation of 20 metric tonnes of cement, which is not entered in the stock register. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 6. In the light of the submissions made, since the recovery of Rs.58,000/- from the pensionary benefits is preceded with an enquiry, the impugned order passed for recovery of Rs.58,000/- from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner, is sustainable. Nothing is there to interfere in this matter. 7. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 09.04.2025 ARR 4 125 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 28496/2018 Dt.09.04.2025 ARR