Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Relief to Staff Nurse After 12-Year Delay in Issuing Charge Memo

LI Network

Published on: 26 January , 2024 at 21:40 IST

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has overturned disciplinary proceedings that spanned over 12 years against a staff nurse, stating that the AP Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rule 1991 was not adhered to.

The Court noted that the disciplinary authority seemed more concerned with proving the accused guilty rather than considering the facts and evidence.

Justice Venkateshwaralu Nimmagadda passed the order in response to a writ petition challenging the orders of the District and Medical Health Officer, imposing a penalty of two annual grade increments with cumulative effects and initiating recovery proceedings amounting to INR 27,850.

The staff nurse was accused in 2003 of failing to maintain proper records when she handed over her responsibilities at a pharmacy.

However, the Court observed that the disciplinary proceedings did not follow the procedures outlined in Section 20 of the APCS(CCA) Rules, which mandates specific charges, provision of essential documents to the accused officer, and conclusion of proceedings within six months.

The Court found the charges against the petitioner to be vague and not properly described, violating Rule 20(3)(i) of the APCS(CCA) Rules, 1991. Despite the petitioner being given an opportunity to respond, the disciplinary proceedings were abruptly concluded without furnishing necessary documents or adhering to principles of natural justice.

Furthermore, the Court criticized the delay in issuing the charge memo, which occurred 12 years after the initiation of disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner was subjected to double punishment, which the court deemed contrary to Article 22 of the Constitution of India, which prohibits double jeopardy.

In conclusion, the court set aside the disciplinary proceedings and directed the authorities to grant all consequential benefits, including promotion, without considering the charges.

The judgment emphasized that disciplinary proceedings must be concluded within six months to avoid being invalidated.

Related Post