Contd… APHC010743832018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3549] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION NO: 36208/2018 Between: 1. BANDELA VISWASA RAO,, S/O. LATE LAXMAIAH, AGED 76 YEARS, OCC. SUB REGISTRAR GRADED (RETD) R/O. H.NO.24-7-7, JONNAVITHULA ST., GANDHINAGAR, VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE (REGN.-L) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522 503 2. THE DIRECTOR AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, ANDHRA PRADESH, EDUPUGALLU, KRISHNA DISTRICT-523144. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, ELURU-53400 I ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the order passed by the APAT in O.A.No.6898 of 2015 dated 14-08-2018 NJS,J & GTK,J W.P No.36208 of 2018 2 Contd… and the impugned order of the recovery issued by the 15t respondent in G.O.Rt.No. 1156/2015 Revenue (Vigilance-II) Department dtd 19-11-2015 and quash or set aside the same as erroneous, irrational, arbitrary, void ab initio, without jurisdiction and vitiated by unreasonable and unexplained delay contrary to the provisions of Rule 9 (2) (b) (ii) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules,1980 and in violation of the provisions of article 14 of the Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A. No. 6898/2015 dated 14-08-2018 and further be pleased to stay the recovery pursuant to G.O. Rt. No. 1156 Revenue (Vigilance-Il) Department dated 19-11-2015 issued by the respondent and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed in IA.No. 1 of 2018 in WP.No. 36208 of 2018, dated 12-12-2018, and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice IA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein Respondent No. 3 in the WP No. 36208 of 2018 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AMARA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS (AP) NJS,J & GTK,J W.P No.36208 of 2018 3 Contd… The Court made the following Order: (per NJS,J) Heard Smt. Samantha Krishna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G Raju, learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. 2. The present writ petition is filed against the orders dated 14.08.2018 in O.A No.6898 of 2015 on the file of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The petitioner filed the said O.A. seeking to declare the action of the respondents in issuing the G.O.Rt.No.1156/2015 dated 19.11.2015, ordering recovery of an amount of Rs.2,79,340/- from the applicant/writ petitioner, as illegal. 3. The Tribunal, while observing that though the applicant could not have been punished by way of imposing penalty under Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, as he retired from service more than four years of the impugned recovery proceedings, dismissed the O.A., holding that the Government is well within its power to make the impugned recovery from the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the order under challenge is not sustainable. She also drawn the attention of this Court to the orders dated 22.10.2007 in the Criminal Petition No.5952 of 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Vide the said order, the criminal case registered against the petitioner in C.C No.103 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, West Godavari District, was allowed and the said proceedings are quashed. 5. However, the matter need not be examined in detail, more particularly, in the light of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. From a reading of which, it is discernible that the Government had not stopped the retirement benefits and pensionary benefits of the writ petitioner, the same NJS,J & GTK,J W.P No.36208 of 2018 4 were released and he is continued to draw the regular pension (counter- affidavit of the respondent No.3). 6. In view of the above, even otherwise, in view of the acquittal of the petitioner from the criminal case, no liability can be fastened upon him. 7. With the above observations, this writ petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA _____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date:15.09.2025 Ksj