High Court for State of TelanganaWP/8821/2020allowed no costs

M. Gopal v. The Union Of India And 2 Others

2024-12-31T.Madhavi Devi21 pages

This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.

[321e ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR.

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NOs: 8821 9492 and 9495 OF 2020 3898 and 3906 of 2021 W.P.No.8821 of 202O Between:

M. Gopal, Sio M. Lingaiah Aged about 44 years, Occ. Office Secretary Ri/o H.No.3-31121111A, Srimalli Gardens, Near Siripratap Residency Hyderguda, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District ...PETITIONER AND

1. The Union of lndia, Rep by its Director Central Hindi Directorate Ministry of Human Resources Development West Block Vll Ramakrishnapuram, New Delhi 1 10066 Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Rep by its General Secretary, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T.S. Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Rep by J. Prem Kumar, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T.S. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents passing office suspension order vide Letter No.925/2019 dated 02-12-2019 witout following due process and suspending the petitioner from the post of office secretary of Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad is illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia, besides in violation of principles of natural justice

and consequently set aside the suspension Order vide Letter No.925/20 19 dated o2-12-2019.

lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 suspension order vide Letter No.925/201 I dated 02-'12-2019 issued in favour of the Petitioner and direct the Respondents to release the salary from the month of December 2019 till date, pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 receive copy of Order dated 17 -O3-2O20 passed in lA.No.1't 2 ot 2O2O in SOP.No.61 ol 2019 by the Hon'ble Xl Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court, Hyderabad as additional material paper in W.P.No.8B21 of 2020, in the interest of justice.

(8) GOMS No 124 daled 1311012003, (9) Letter dated 1410712020 along with Translation (10) Letter daled 2710712020 with neat copy (11) Letter dated 1010812020 as additional material paper in W P No 9495 of 2020 in thq interest of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.A.K.MUKHEED counselfor the Respondent No.1:

3I]""4:lE[ivEEN KUMAR,

Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3 : SRI J.VENKAT NARSIMHA REDDY W.P.No.9492 OF 2020 Between:

H. Anand kumar, S/ o Late H. Gyaneshwar Rao, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Superintendent, Fl/ o H. No.3 - 1 - 54, Jamala Basti, Nimboliadda, Near A.K. Bhavan, Kachiguda.Hydetabad - 27 ...PETITIONER AND

1. The Union of lndia, Rep by its Director Central Hindi Directorate Ministry of Human Resources Development West Block Vll Ramakrishnapuram New Delhi 1 10066

2. Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Rep by its General Secretary, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T.S.

3. Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad,, Rep by J. Prem Kumar, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road,,l'lyderabad, T.S. (R- rs FoRMAL PARTY) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents issuing suspension order in form of office notice vide Letter No.965/2020 dated 0410112020 without following due process of law not allowing the Petitioner to discharge his duties in Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad is illegal, arbitrary, in Violation of Articles 14,21 and 300 - A of Constitution of lndia, besides in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the suspension Order vide Letter No.965/2020 dated O4lO1l2O20.

lA NO: 3 OF 2020 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 receive copies of ('1) Order dated20lO3l2O19 passed in l. A No.1 oI 2A1B in CMA No. 748 ol 2018 (2) Judgment dated 08/06/2020 passed in CIVAS No. 748 of 2018, (3) Order dated 1811212019 passed in W.P. No. '15766 of 2019 (4) FIR No. 12412018 dated 1410712018 (5) Police Complaint dated 0211212019 (6) Constitution of Hindi Prachar Sabha (Bye Laws) dated 1910211961 (7) GOMS No.

1415 dated 2210711570 (B) GOMS No. 124 dated 1311012003 (9) Letter dated 1410712020 along with Translation ('10) Letter dated 271O712020 with near copy

(11) Letter dated 10/08/2020 (12) Auditors Letter dated 2210812019 as additional material paper in W.P. No 9492 of 2020 in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 202A 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 suspension order vide Letter No.965/2020 dated 04-01-2020 issued in favour of the Petitioner without following due process of law and direct the I Respondents to release the salary from the month of December 2019 till date, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

IA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 receive copy of Order dated 17-O3-2O2O passed in lA.No.112 of 2O2O in SOP.No.6l of 2Ol9 by the Honble Xl Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court, Hyderabad as additional material paper in W.p.No.9492 ol 2O2O, in the interest of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI D.RAMAKRISHNA counsel for the Respondent No.1:

39]r"d?lEIAVEEN KUMAR, Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI J.VENKAT NARSIMHA REDDY W.P.No.9495 OF 2020 Between:

fajender Prasad Kapoor, S/o Veerender Prasad Kapoor Aged about 46 Assistant Superintendent, R/o H.No.20-2-621, Hussaini Alain, Baragalli, years, Occ.

l-{yderabad - AND ...PETITIONER

1. The Union of lndia, Rep by its Director Central Hindi Directorate Ministry of Human Resources Development West Block Vll Ramakrishnapuram New Delhi 1 10066

2. Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Rep by its General Secretary, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Maig, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T.S.

3. Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Rep by J. Prem Kumar, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Marg, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T.S. (R- rs FoRMAL PARTY) ,..

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents not allowing the Peittioner to discharge the lawful duties as Assistant Superintendent (Examination Department) in Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad without following any due process of law is illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14,21 &,300-A of Constitution of lndia, besides in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to discharge his lawful duties (Examination Department) in Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad.

lA NO: 3 OF 2020 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 receive copies of (1) Order dated 2OtO3l2O19 passed in lA No. 1 of 2018 in CMA No. 748 ot 2018, (2) Judgement dated 08/06/2020 passed in CIt/lAS No. 748 of 2018, (3) Order dated 1811212019 passed in WP No. 15766 of 2019 (4) FIR No. 12412018 dated 0410712018 (5) Police Complaint daled 0211212019 (6) Constitution of Hindi Prachar Sabha (Bye Laws) dated 1910211961 (7) GOMS No. 124 dated 2210711970 (B) GOMS No. 124 dated 13/1O12003, (9) Letter daled 1410712O20 along with Translation (10) Letter dated 2710712020 with neat copy (1i ) Letter dated 10/08/2020 as additional material paper in W. P. No. 9495 of 2020 in the interest of justice.

lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 Respondents to allow the Petitioner to discharge his lawful duties (Examination Department) in Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad and pay all the arrears to the Petitioner from the month of December 2019 till date, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

lA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 receive copy of Order dated 17 -03-2020 passed in lA.No.112 of 2020 in SOP,No.61 of 2019 by the Honble Xl Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court, Hyderabad as additional material paper in W.P.No,9495 ol 2020, in the interest of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI POODATTU AMARENDER counsel for the Respondent No.1:

|Il.A%E[tvEEN KUMAR, Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI J.VENKAT NARSIMHA REDDY W.P.No.3898 OF 2021 Between:

H. Anand Kumar, S/o H.Gyanehshwar Rao (Late), Aged about 55 years, Wa Superintendent, Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad, Rl/o 3-1-54, Jamal basthi, Nimboli Adda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad ...PETITIONER AND

1. The Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad, rep., by its Pradhan Mantri/ General Secretary, Sri Ram Hindi Bhavan, LN Gupta Marg, Nampally station road, Hyderabad.

2. The Union of lndia, rep., by its Director, Central Hindi Directorate, Ministry of Human Resource Development, West Block Vll, Ramakrishnapuram, New '

Delhi -1 10066 ...RESP.ONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of ihe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the lmpugned Lr.No.1091/2021

dt. 1110112021, issued by the 1st Respondent in terminating the services of the Petitioner, without issuing any notice, opportunity and without conducting any enquiry and set aside the same by declaring them as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently, direct the Respondents to Re-instate the Petitioner, into. the duty forthwith, with all Sgrvice and Monetary benefits. IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 Respondents, to Re-instate the Petitioner into the duty, forthwith, by Suspending the operation of lmpugned Orders issued by the 1st Respondent vide 1r.No.1097/2021 dt. 1110112021 .

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI D.RAMAKRISHNA Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : J VENKATRAM NARSIMHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY.SOL.GENERAL W.P.No.3906 OF 2021 Between:

M. Gopal, S/o M. Lingaiah, Aged about 44 years, W/a Office Secretary, Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad, Rl/o 3-3-1121111A, Srimalli Gardens, Ra.jendra nagar, RR District ..PETITIONER AND The Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad, rep., by its Pradhan Mantri/ General Secretary, Sri Ram Hindi Bhavan, LN Gupta Marg, Nampally station road, Hyderabad.

The Union of lndia, rep., by its Director, Central Hindi Directorate, Ministry of Human Resource Development, West Block Vll, Ramakrishnapuram, New Delhi -1 10066.

t ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of

( Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the lmpugned Lr.No.1096/2021 dt. 09.01.2021, issued by the 15'1 Respondent in terminating the services of the Petitioner, without issuing any notice, opportunity and without conducting any enquiry and set aside the same by declaring them as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the .Constitution of lndia and consequently, direct the Respondents to Re-instate the Petitioner, into the duty forthwith, with all Service and Monetary benefits. lA NO: 2 OF 2021 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 Reinstate the Petitioner into the duty, forthwith, by suspending the operation of lmpugned Orders issued by the 1st Respondent vide Lr.No.109612021 dt. 09.01 .2021 .

lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 permit the petitioner to file copy of the lmpugned Order issued by the l st Respondent vide 1r.No.1096/2021 dt.09.01 .2021 ,by dispensing with the copyof the Original Order. Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. D.RAMAKRISHNA Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : J VENKATRAM NARSIMHA REDDY counserfor the Respondent No.2 ' ;f]."4%E[tXiEN KUMAR, The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER t

n TIIE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTTCE T. MADIIAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION Nos.882l 9492 and 9495 of 2020 3898 and 3 of202l COMMON ORDER:

Since common issue is involved in all these writ petitions, they were taken up and heard together and are being disposed of by this common and consolidated order.

The petitioner in W.P.No.882l of 2020 is seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents ln passing the suspension order vide letter No.925l2019 dated 02.12.2019 without following due process as illegal, arbitrary and unconstihrtional and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently to set aside the suspension order and to pass such other order or orders. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P.No.3906 of 2021 seeking a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned Lr. No.1096/2021, dated 09.01.2021 issued by respondent No. 1 terminating the services of the I petitioner without issuing any notice and without affording any \ opportunity and without conducting any enquiry as illegal, ur6it.ury,

TMD.J w.P.Nos.882 l, 9492 ard 9495 of2020, 3898 and 3906 ol202l discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into the duty forthwith with all service and monetary benehts and to pass such other order or orders 3.

The petitioner in W.P.No.9492 of 2020 is seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents issuing suspension order vide letter No.965 of 2020 dated 04.01.2020 without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of principles ofnatural justice and consequently to set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders. Thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P.No.3898 ol 2021 seeking a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned Lr. No.109712021, dated 11.01.2021 issued by respondent No. I temrinating the services of the petitioner without issuing any notice and affording any opportunity and without conducting any enquiry as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into the duty forthwith with all service and monetary benefits and to pass such I other order or orders.

/ \ I \ I

TMD.J W.P,Nos.882 l, 9492 and 9495 of 2020, 3E98 and 3906 of202l 4.

W.P.No.9495 of 2020 is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner herein to discharge his lauful duties as Assistant Superintendent (Examination Department) in Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad, without following any due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstihrtional and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to discharge his lawful I duties as Assistant Superintendent (Examination Department) in Hindi I Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad and to pass such other order or orders. I I 5.

Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.Nos.9492 of 2020 and 3898 of 2021 are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a temporary Clerk vide Lr.No.331/1984 dated 07.08.1984 in Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad and subsequently, in the year 1989, the petitioner has been appointed permanently vlde Lr.No.3 I 1/89, dated I 5.09. 1 989. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Registrar of Examinations on 28.06.2019 and later to the post of Office Superintendent. On 04.01.2021, the petitioner's services were suspended on the ground that there were allegations of financial irregularities against him and that the loss had occurred to the Sabha. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner

TMD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 an <19495 of 2020, 3898 and 3906 of202l filed W.P.No.9 492 of 2020 and the same is pending consideration before this Court. l'hereafter, the respondent No.1 issued letter dated 11.01.2021 terminating the services of the petitioner. Challenging the said termination order, dated 11.01.2021 without conducting any enquiry and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, W.P.No.3898 of 2021 has been filed.

Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.Nos.882l of 2020 and 3906 of 2021 are that the petitioner herein rvas initially appointed as a temporary Affender vlde Lr.No.9/l995 dated 25.04.1995 in Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad and subsequently, in the year 1989, the petitioner has been appointed permanently vide Lr.No.294/2000, dated 09.11.2000. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Clerk-ll on 03.11.2007, to thti post of Clerk Grade-I on 01.04.2012, to the post of Office Superintendent on 22.12.2016 and later to the post of Offrce Secretary on 15.06.2018. On 02.12.2019, the petitioner's services were suspended on the ground that the petitioner acted contrary to the interest of the society by filing court cases without any permission from the Sanchalan Samithi. Aggrieved by the same, the petitionei filed W.P.No.8821 of 2020 and the same is pending consideration before this

n I'MD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 and 9495 of 2020, 3898 and 3906 of202l Court. Meanwhile, the respondent No.1 issued a letter dated 09.01.2021 terminating the services of the petitioner. Chatlenging the said termination order, dated 09.01.2021 without conducting any enquiry and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, W.P.No.3906 of 2021 has been filed.

Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.No.9495 of 2020 are that the petitioner herein was initially appointed as a temporary Clerk vide Lr.No.223l98 dated 10.12.1998 in Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad and thereafter appointed as II Grade Clerk vide Lr.No.340/2001 dated 03.01.2001. Subsequently, in the year 2004, the petitioner has been appointed as permanent II Grade Clerk vide Lr.No.747/2004, dated I 20.05.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Clerk Grade-I on 24.04.2013 and also to the post of Assistant Superintendent I on 15.06.2018. On 29.09.2019, the petitioner was removed from service without issuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.69l8 of 2019 before this Court and the same is pending consideration. Later on 15.04.2019, the respondents reinstated the petitioner into service, but the resp&dents \ \ I

.TMD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 ard 9495 of2020.

3898 and 3906 of202I are not allowing the petitioner to discharge his duties and were also not paying salary without following due process of law. Challenging the said action of the respondents, W.P.No.9495 of 2020 is filed. 8.

Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar circumstances in-W.P.No.15799 of 2019 dated 18.12.2019, this Court had set aside the punishment order with liberly to the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner therein after oonducting necessary enquiry and after giving an opportunity ofhearing. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners has also placed reliance upon the following other judgments:

l. MdGhouse v. Correspondenl, Dakshina Bharal Hindi Pracharasahhal I I

2. M. David Sam Roy v. The Hyderabod Public School Sociely & Others2

3. T.K. Chandran v. Dakshina Bharatha Hindi Prachar Sabhu3. 9.

The respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha" have filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations of the petitioners and stated th4t these ( 2OO2 Supp2 ALD 453 -2012 l ALD 350 rI!99 o ArR {Ker) 1s8 /

TMD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 an d 9495 of 2020, 3898 and 3906 of202l writ petitions are not maintainable as the respondent is not the 'state' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of lndia. Learned counsel for the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha further submitted that the Union of India is not at all a necessary paxty, as it is in no way connected to the society. It is further submitted that the respondentsHindi Prachar Sabha have strictly adhered to the procedure of enquiry and also the principles of natural justice and that it has issued notices to the petitioners after suspension, but the petitioners did not participate in the enquiry and therefore, on the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer holding the charges as proved, the services of the petitioners have been terminated.

It is further submitted that there are lwo crimes pending against the petitioners in W.P.Nos.9492 of 2020,3898 of 2021,8821 of 2020 and,3906 of 2021 on the file of CCS, Abids Police Station. One of the crimes is Crime No. 124 of 2018 for misappropriation of funds and forgery. Leamed counsel for the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SL Mary's Education Society and another v. Rajendra Prasad Bhargava and others|, in support ofhis contentions.

,. / n {zozg) a scc asa \ t

TMD.J w.P.Nos.{i821, 9492 and 9495 ot 2020, 3898 and 3906 of202l

10. The petitioner in W.P.Nos.9492 of 2020 and 3898 of 2021 has filed a reply affidavit in W.P.No.3898 of 2021, countering the averqnents made in the counter affidavit and submitted that this Court, in a number of cases, has entertained the writ petition against the respondents herein and therefore, these Writ Petitions are also maintainable as the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha is receiving grants from the Cenhal Govemment. It is further submitted that the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha received recognition from the State and Central Government for conducting Hindi examinations. It is further submitted that alleged notices for enqr:iry were never issued to the petitioner and no enquiry was conducted and therefore, the contentions of the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha, that it has followed the principles of natural justice is not correcl.

As regards the criminal cases against the petitioner, it is submitted that there is no such case registered against the petitioner on the file of CCS, Abids Police Station. Thus, he prayed for setting aside of the impugned order.

The petitioner in W.P.Nos.882l of 2020 and 3906 of 2Q21 has 1i\ filed a reply affldavit stating that the petitioner has also been suspended /

.IMD,J W.t'.Nos-Es21, 9492 and 949s or 2o2o'

3t9E and 3906 of202l from service solely on the ground that the petitioner and others have participated in the election process and have filed suits before Civil Court, only in order to take revenge against the petitioner.

12. The Union of India-respondent No.2 filed instructions dated I 01.10.2024 wherein it is stated that the Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha is a society functioning as a provincial branch, which is commonly referred to as the Central Sabha and further that the High Coud of Kerala and High Court of Karnataka have held that the Prantheeya Sabha's in Kerala and Kamataka states discharge a public function relating to Article 351 of the Constitution of tndia and hence are amenable to the Writ j urisdiction.

13. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that in the past, writ petitions have been filed against the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha and they have been entertained by this Court. Further, from the instructions received from the Union of India, the High Court of Kerala and the High Court of Kamataka have already held that the writ petitions against the Prantheeya Sabhas are amenable. In view of the same, this Court is also inclined to entertain theie writ \ \ [:

TMD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 and 9495 of2020, 1898 ard 3906 of202l petitions and objections of the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha" about the maintainability of these Writ Petitions are thus rejected.

14. As regards the merits of W.P.Nos.9492 of 2020 and 3898 of 2021, I this Court finds that in their counter affidavits, the respondents-Hindi Prachar Sabha claim to have issued notices to the petitioneis for attending before the enquiry, but the writ petitioner has not appeared before the Enquiry Officer. However, the copies of the same are not enclosed along with the counter affidavit. The petitioner has specifically denied the service of notice on the petitioner. Further, except for references to the suspension order dated 04.01 .2020, the explanation of the petitioner dated I 3.0 I .2020, and the sub-committee letter dated 19.02.2020 and the enquiry report of the Sub-Committee, there is no mention of any other document in the termination order.

Therefore, it is in clear violation of the principles ol natural justice and is liable to be set aside. The suspension order dated 04.01.2020 and the termination order dated 11.01.2021 issued by respondent No.l are accordingly set aside.

TMD,J W.P.Nos.882l, 9492 and, 9495 of 2020, 3898 and 3906 of202l reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The treatment of the period between the termination order and the order of reinstatement shall be considered by the respondents after a decision is taken with regard to the services of the petitioner in view of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. In the result, the W.P.Nos.9492 of 2020 and 3898 of 2021 are allowed.

15. Since the facts and circumstances in W.P.Nos.882l of 2020 and 3906 of 2021 are also similar, this Court deems it fit and proper to set aside the suspension order dated 02.12.2019 and the termination order dated 09.01.2021 issued by respondent No.l and to dir6ct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service immediately with liberty to proceed against the petitioner by conducting the departmental enquiry in t accordance with law i.e., after giving sufhcient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Accordingly, the W.P.Nos.882l of 2020 and 3906 of 2021 I I are allowed by setting aside the suspension order dated A2-12.2019 and tlre termination order dated 09.01 .2021.

16. As regards W.P.No.9495 of 2020, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to discharge his

TMD.J W.P.Nos-8t2 l. 9492 and 9495 of 2020, 3E98 and 3906 of202l lawful duties (Examination Department) ln Hindi Prachar Sabha, Hyderabad. Accordingly, the W.P.No.9495 of 2020 is allowed.

17. ln both of these petitions also, the treahnent to be given to the period between suspension/termination and the reinstatement shall be decided by the respondents in accordance with law, after a decision is taken in the disciplinary proceedings initiated and are pending against them.

18. With the above directions, all the Writ Petitions are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, ifany, shall also stand dismissed. SD/.P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Director, Central Hindi Directorate Ministry of. Human Resources Development, Union of lndia, West Block Vll Ramakrishnapuram New Delhi 1 10066

2. The General Secretary, Hindi Prachar Sabha Hyderabad, Sriram Hindi Bhavan, L.N Gupta Mar!, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad, T S.

3. One CC to SRI M.A.K.MUKHEED, Advocate. [OPUC]

4. One CC to MR.D.RAMAKRISHNA Adovacte IOPUCI

5. One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, (Deputy Solicitor Genetal of lndia), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. TOPUCI

6. One CC to SRI J,VENKATA NARASIMHA REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC]

7. Two CD Copies.

BSK 3-O{.F < {o :l< p o"A .ttlt'A^^""'evrAet 'aAr'o o''* e coP'9 BS \AT

HIGH COURT DATED:31 11212024 CC TODAY ( ca 1HE gr4 ^($ ro I 0 2 JAli 20fr o i.\ I .9PATC1 I COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.8821,9492 and 9495 OF 2020, 3898 and 3906 of 2021 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS t r0co??4 W If,ct