APHC010543052022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NOs: 33148 & 40704 of 2022 WRIT PETITION NO: 33148/2022 Between: 1. K. JOGANANDA RAO, S/O .LATE SATYANARAYANA RAO , AGED 67 YEARS, OCC- RETIRED SUB-REGISTRAR GRADE-1, R/O .FLAT.NO.2C-401,PARAMOUNT RESIDENCY, MODI APARTMENTS,NAGARAM, HYDERABAD-500 082 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SPI CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE (REGN-I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503 2. THE COMMISSIONERAND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, ANDHRA PRADESH, EDPUGALLU,KRISHNA DISTRICT, - 523 144 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 518 002 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT. 5. THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL AANDE, ANDHRA PRADESH, BHARATHI NAGAR,12TH ROAD BENZ CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R DISTRICT. 2 ...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 to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting full Pension and other pensionary benefits to the petitioner is arbitrary and contrary to law and unconstitutional and violative of the Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and directing the respondents to grant the said pensionary benefits to him with interest @ 18percent per annum from the date of retirement to the date of actual payments and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the Representation dated- 01.09.2022 of the petitioner by fixing outer time limit and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 Pleased to fix an early date of hearing of the above W.P.No.33148/2022 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AMARA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I WRIT PETITION NO: 40704/2022 Between: 1. J RAMAKRISHNA RAJU, S/O .LATE SANYASI RAJU, AGED 69 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED SUB-REGISTRAR GRADE-1, R/O .FLAT.NO.HIG 94, APHB COLONY, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 534 201 ...PETITIONER 3 AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, THROUGH ITS SPL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE (REGN-I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 503 2. THE COMMISSIONERAND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, ANDHRA PRADESH, EDPUGALLU, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT, - 521 151 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 534 001 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT. 5. THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, (AANDE), ANDHRA PRADESH,BHARATHI NAGAR, 12TH ROAD BENZ CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT. ...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 to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents charges framed against the Petitioner in (a) DIG Eluru Procgs No. G1/121/2010 dated 01-04- 2011 (b) G.O.Rt No 1322 Revenue (Vig VI) Dept., dated. 23-08-2013 and (c) G.O.Rt No .1513 Revenue (Vig VI) Dept. dated.09-10-2013 in not granting the Petitioner full pension and other retrial benefits is arbitrary and contrary to law and unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and set aside the above proceedings and consequently directing the respondents to grant the said pensionary benefits to him along with interest @ 18percent per annum from the date of retirement to the dates of actual payments and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the representations dated. 30-09-2022 of the petitioner by fixing outer time limit and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 4 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 fix an early date of hearing of the above WP No. 40704/2022 dated 19-12- 2022 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AMARA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Heard Sri Amara Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for the respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is against the inaction of the respondents in not granting pension and retirement benefits. The petitioner (K. Jogananda Rao) was superannuated on 31.10.2012 as District Registrar of Stamps and Registrations. The petitioner in W.P.No.40704 of 2022 (J. Rama Krishna Raju) has retired from service on 31.07.2011 as Sub-Registrar (Grade-I). The pension papers forwarded to the Deputy Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Eluru, the respondent No.3 herein. However, the respondent No.1 granted only provisional pension, on account of charges framed against the petitioner(s) subsequent to the date of retirement from service. Seeking release of the pensionary benefits, the instant Writ Petitions have been filed. 5 3. It is contended that charges were framed pursuant to an objection raised in special audit. The first charge framed against the petitioner (K. Jogananda Rao) that the petitioner had failed to adopt proper market value as per market value guidelines register maintained for that purpose of registrations while registering the four documents. Thus caused loss of revenue to the State Exchequer. The second charge was out of 182 documents registered the deficit in stamp duty exceeded Rupees One Lakh in almost 33 documents. The petitioner contends that the first charge was on the basis of special audit report and which was not communicated to the petitioner and as far as the second charge is concerned, there was no loss caused to the Exchequer as all the 182 documents relate to other than apartments, it is only in the case of properties of composite value relating to apartments, the rates as per list dated 16.07.2010 had to be adopted. The charge framed against J. Rama Krishna Raju was that had failed to adopt proper market value as per the market value guidelines register being maintained for the purpose of registrations and caused loss to the Exchequer. The second charge was out of 217 documents registered the deficit in stamp duty exceeded Rupees One Lakh in almost 43 documents. 4. To enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner, the Enquiry Officer was appointed. The petitioner has submitted his defense statements denying the charges. The Enquiry Officer vide his report, dated 08.12.2015 submitted report stating that the charges framed against the petitioners were not proved. It is contended that despite the dropping of the 6 charges, the respondents have not concluded the departmental proceedings and the retiral benefits have not been released to the petitioners. 5. The respondents have filed counter-affidavit stating that the delay in concluding the disciplinary proceedings is due to administrative reasons, since the petitioner has caused loss to the Revenue the pensionary benefits have been withheld in view of the disciplinary proceedings. After conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioners, pensionary benefits would be released depending on the out-come of the said disciplinary proceedings. 6. Having regard to the contentions advanced, without going into the merits of the case, since, the enquiry has already been concluded as long back as 08.12.2015, however, the respondents have not issued any proceedings concluding the disciplinary proceedings so far. Thus, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner(s) within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of the order. However, there shall be a direction to the respondents to pay the pensionary benefits to the petitioners, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the order and the said payment shall be subject to out-come of the disciplinary proceedings that have been initiated against the petitioner(s). It is pertinent to observe that, the respondents shall give due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner(s) and the petitioner(s) are at liberty to raise all the contentions in the disciplinary proceedings. 7 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 08.10.2025 MSI