- (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and orders dated 26.2.2004 and 13.8.2004 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No. 14674 of 1997, and in Review W.P.M.P. No. 18654 of 2004. The issue involved in this case is as to whether the authority, lower or higher than of the appointing authority, can initiate the proceedings against the delinquent on grounds of alleged misconduct.
(2.) Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that: A. Respondent had been working as an Assistant Foreman in the Ordnance Factory, Yeddumailaram, when charge memo dated 8.1.1992 was issued to him on the alleged demand of bribe of Rs. 37,000/- and acceptance of Rs. 4,150/- on 3.8.1991 in cash from the representative of firm M/s Teela International Limited, Hosur, Bangalore. B. Aggrieved by the said charge memo, Respondent preferred O.A. No. 1641 of 1995 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter called as 'Tribunal') on 23.12.1995 on the ground that the charge memo had been issued to the Respondent by the authority not competent to do so, being subordinate to his appointing authority. C. The said application was allowed vide judgment and order dated 4.1.1996 only on the ground that the officer who had issued the charge memo was subordinate to the appointing authority of the delinquent and thus, had no competence to initiate the disciplinary proceedings. D. Aggrieved by the said order, a Review Application was filed by the Appellants which was dismissed vide order dated 20.3.1997. E. Aggrieved, the Appellants filed the Writ Petition No. 14674 of 1997 before the High Court which has been dismissed vide impugned judgment and order dated 30.6.2004. Review Application filed by the Appellants also stood dismissed vide order dated 13.8.2004. Hence, this appeal.
(3.) This Court entertained the appeal vide order dated 30.4.2007 but did not grant any interim relief and in spite of notice to the Respondent, he did not enter appearance.;