GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

PUBLIC SERVICES - Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad - Departmental Proceedings under Rule-20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 - Articles of Charges - Issued.

It is proposed to hold an enquiry against Sri Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner(Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad in accordance with the procedurelaid down in rule 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control andAppeal ) Rules, 1991.

2. Thesubstance of the imputations of misconduct or mis-behaviour in respect of which theinquiry is proposed to be held is set out in the enclosed statement of articles of chargesare proposed to be sustained are also enclosed (Annexure - II and III).

3. SriSri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad isdirected to admit within fifteen days of the receipt of this order, a written statement ofhis defence.

4. SriSri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad isinformed that an inquiry will be held only in respect of those articles of charges as arenot admitted. He should therefore,specifically admit of deny each articles of charge.

5. SriSri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad isfurther informed that if he does not submit his/her written statement of defence on orbefore the date specified in para three above, further action will be proceeded based onthe material available.

6. Attention of Sri Sri P. Venkat Rao,City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad is invited to Rule 24of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, under which no GovernmentServant shall bring or attempt to bring any political or outside influence to bear uponany superior authority to further his interest in respect of matters pertaining to his service underthe Government. If any representation isreceived on his behalf from another person in respect of any matter dealt with in theseproceedings it will be presumed that Sri P. Venkat Rao is aware of such a representationand that it has been made at his instance and action will be taken against him forviolation of Rule-24 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

SriP. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad throughthe Commissioner and Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. (with a request to serve the G.O. on theindividual and returned the served copy to the Government forthwith).

TheCommissioner and Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad

Statement of articles of charge framed against Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner(Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad

Article-I:-

Thatthe said City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad.

Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation ofHyderabad has failed to take prompt action toprevent the unauthorised construction made in the Premises No.1-8-495/22-25 Vikar Manzil,Secunderabad in violation of the status quo orders issued by III Senior Civil Judge, CityCivil Court, Secunderabad in O.S.No.84/98. Theparty has mentioned that the construction made was Ground + 1 floor only in O.S.No.84/98filed in the Court and obtained the status quo orders on 01-04-1998. But the construction of stilt / cellar + 3upper floors was made violating the orders of the court. This reveals that the party has constructed 2 floors after 01-04-1998i.e., the Court Status Quo Orders. Thisadditional constructions in violation of the Court orders was made due to inaction on thepart of the above Officer.

Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation ofHyderabad has not taken prompt steps to bring to the notice of the Municipal StandingCounsel about the unauthorised construction taking place in violation of status quo ordersof the Court by filling Photographs and Panchanamas, from time to time during the progressof the work to enable M.S.C. to bring the matter to the notice of the Court and also toget the status quo orders vacated. Theinaction on the part of the Officers has enabled the party to complete the unauthorisedconstruction in violation of rules and court orders.

The Vikar Manzil was notified as Heritage Building as per G.O.Ms.No.102 M.A., dated23-03-1998 and any unauthorised construction in the premises of Heritage Building shouldnot be allowed for the preservation of Heritage Building. The fact of unauthorised construction in the Heritage Premises has notbeen brought to the notice of the Court or higher authorities by him to issue appropriateorders. Thus, he has failed todischarge his duties in preserving the Heritage of the City.

List of documents by which the articles of charge framed against Sri P. Venkat Rao,City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad are proposed to besustained.

It has been brought to the notice of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation ofHyderabaad, by the Competent authority that Sri K. Shyam Siddartha, has constructed stilt/ cellar manzil, Begumpet, Secunderabad without any permission from Municipal Corporationof Hyderabad. The construction was madein the approved layout area and the party has obtained status quo orders from the IIISenior Civil Judge, City Civil Court on 01-04-1998 in O.S.No.84/98 and proceeded with theconstruction in violation of court orders. Onperusal of the connected records it is revealed that the concerned Town Planing Officershave not taken prompt steps to get the status quo orders given by the City Civil Courtvacated, even though the party was going ahead with the construction, by bringing thefactual position to the notice of the Court. Theparty has mentioned in O.S.No.83/98 filed in City Civil Court that the constructions madeare ground and first floor only at House No.1-8-495/22 and obtained status quo orders on01-04-1998. But in the BRS applicationform, the party has requested for regularisation on stilt / cellar, + 3 upper floors. Therefore, it is evident that the party hasconstructed additional floors after obtaining the status quo order from the Court andviolated the orders of the court. TheHigh Court in W.P.M.P.No.35276/98 in W.P.No.28904/98 have issued inter in directions“Not be demolish if the construction was completed before 30-06-1998 and is inaccordance with the G.O.Ms.No.419 M.A., dated 30-07-1998”. Hence, the construction made before30-06-1998 is liable for demolition and could have been prevented by the Officers bytaking prompt action.

It is also observed that the status quo orders of the City Civil Court relate toonly house Number 1-8-495/22, whereas the BRS application and the physical inspection ofpremises revealed that the construction was made in H.No.1-8-495/22 to 25, which clearlyestablished inaction of the part of the concerned Town Planning Officers / Staff. Further, the premises of Vikar Manzil wasnotified as Heritage Building as per G.O.Ms.No.102 M.A., dated 23-03-1998 and theconcerned T.P. Officials and staff have not brought the fact that unauthorisedconstruction is being made in the premises of the Heritage Building and not taken promptaction to stop unauthorised construction. Even though there are complaints from Smt. Yousufunnisa Begumand Smt. Asifunnisa Begum about the illegal and unauthorised construction being made inthe premises and that there is legal dispute over the property, concerned officials andstaff have not taken any steps to prevent the unauthorised constructions and delayed theaction on the court case filed by the party. Theyhave failed to send necessary information i.e., Photographs and Panchanama from time totime when the construction was under progress, even after issue of status quo orders bythe court, to enable the MSC to bring the violation of the court orders to the notice ofHon’ble Court and to vacant the status quo orders to take action against theunauthorised construction.

Therefore, Sri P. Venkat Rao, City Planner (Secunderabad Zone) MunicipalCorporation of Hyderabad is responsible for willful inaction and deficiencies indischarging their legitimate duties.