C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J. - (1.)Feeling aggrieved by order, dated 03.8.2017, in Original Application No.1254 of 2017 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad (for short the Tribunal), the applicant therein filed this Writ Petition.
(2.)The petitioner is a Forest Section Officer under suspension. A charge memo was issued to him on 29.10.2016 by respondent No.1. Questioning the charge memo, he filed the afore-mentioned O.A. The main plank on which the petitioner has filed the afore- mentioned O.A. was that respondent No.1-disciplinary authority has no jurisdiction to appoint an Inquiry Officer even before receiving the written statement of defence from him and that his action is contrary to Rule-20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (for short "the Rules).
(3.)It was the pleaded case of the respondents before the Tribunal that on receipt of the charge memo, the petitioner made a representation, dated 11.11.2016, to the Divisional Forest Officer, Wild Life Division, Rajampet, requesting for permission to peruse the record and that the said Officer has, accordingly, granted permission. It was their further pleaded case that on perusal of the record, the petitioner has informed the personnel that all those records are available with him and by saying so, he declined to give a certificate of perusal of record; that as he has not submitted his written statement of defence, a notice was issued to him on 20.02.2017 by respondent No.1 asking him to submit his written statement of defence; and that as he has not responded to the said notice, respondent No.1 appointed the Sub-Divisional Forest Officer, Kodur as Inquiry Officer and the Forest Range Officer, Sanipaya Range as Presenting Officer, by proceedings, vide Proc.No.776/2016/S4, dated 13.3.2017.