Chief Commissioner of State Tax (ap) Vs G Prabhakara Murthy (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that usurping the jurisdiction of the disciplinary authority is impermissible. Thus, order is set aside and matter remitted back to the disciplinary authority for consideration.
Facts-
The intra-Court appeal is preferred assailing the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby the learned Single Judge quashed the disciplinary proceedings midway, i.e., at the stage when the enquiry had been completed, the report had been submitted to the disciplinary authority, and the disciplinary authority had issued the second show cause notice enclosing the report and calling for his explanation.
Conclusion-
Held that the learned Single Judge, in our considered opinion, has erred in taking up the role of the disciplinary authority and in attempting to substitute the opinion of the disciplinary authority with the opinion of this Court, which we find to be impermissible. The learned Single Judge could not have usurped or preempted the statutorily empowered disciplinary authority from forming an opinion on imposing or not imposing any penalties. The authority to impose or not impose any penalty, as provided under the rules, is in the exclusive domain of the disciplinary authority, an action that has now been preempted by the impugned order. In our opinion, the Writ Petition itself was premature in the absence of any adverse impact on the rights or service conditions of the Writ Petitioner. Thus, we have no hesitation in allowing the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned order is set aside, and the matter is remitted back to the disciplinary/competent authority for consideration.
