High Court Upholds Removal Of Court Staff For Attending Duty While Intoxicated

A Division Bench of Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice T.C.D. Sekhar heard a writ petition challenging the order dated 04.06.2018 by which the disciplinary authority removed an Office Subordinate from service under Rule 9(ix) of the AP Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1991. The petition contested departmental findings that the employee repeatedly attended court duties while under the influence of alcohol and engaged in misconduct.

The High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the penalty of removal, holding that the proof on record established misconduct and unbecoming conduct of a government servant. The court noted that the enquiries, medical certificates and breath-analysis evidence together supported the disciplinary finding that the petitioner had “attended the duty in a drunken state” and had used “filthy language” and given “reckless answers” to members of presiding officers’ families. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “The above evidence coupled with the certificates issued by the Medical Officers would prove that the petitioner was under the influence of alcohol while attending the duty in the Courts and also while attending guard duty at the residential quarters of the Presiding Officers. Having considered the case on hand, it is evident that, there are series of incidents against the petitioner that he attended the duty by consuming alcohol.” The Bench concluded that it “does not find any merit in the Writ Petition” and refused to interfere with the order impugned.

Background

The petitioner was appointed as an Office Subordinate on 06.11.2014 and was initially posted to the Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Penukonda. Complaints from seven advocate clerks and three members of the public alleged that he demanded money and attended court in a drunken condition. On 14.05.2015 the Civil Assistant Surgeon issued a certificate recording consumption of alcohol; a departmental enquiry followed and a report dated 12.01.2016 led to a show-cause notice. Charge No.1 (demanding money) was later dropped as not proved; Charge No.2 alleged that he attended duty intoxicated and abused an advocate.

The petitioner denied the allegations and attributed odour to medication for a liver ailment; he also contended procedural irregularity in the enquiry, including that the Enquiry Officer did not examine the wife of PW-1 (the presiding officer). Subsequent incidents were recorded while the petitioner served on deputation at Kalyandurg and Kadiri, including a medical examination on 28–29.07.2016 which produced a certificate showing alcohol consumption and a reported alcohol level of “40 ml., per 100 mg., (stage-1)”, and a breath analysis readout of 63% recorded by a Sub-Inspector. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 06.08.2016 and faced multiple charge memos thereafter.

An Enquiry Officer ultimately found the Charge No.2 proved. The disciplinary authority by order dated 04.06.2018 imposed the major penalty of removal from service. Before the High Court, respondents relied on medical certificates, breath analysis and eyewitness statements from presiding officers and police. The High Court accepted that the evidence and medical reports “would prove that the petitioner was under the influence of alcohol while attending the duty” and that the series of incidents warranted the penalty. The writ petition was dismissed; there was “no order as to costs” and pending miscellaneous applications were closed. No precedent was overruled or followed beyond application of relevant service and conduct rules.

Case Details: Case No.: WP No.10669 of 2019 Case Title: M. Venkatesulu v. The Registrar (Administration), High Court A.P., Amaravathi & Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): J. Sudheer, Advocate For the Respondent(s): P. S. P. Suresh Kumar, Standing Counsel