RT-298: PUBLIC SERVICES – Prohibition & Excise Department – Allegation of acquisition of assets disproportionate to the known sources of legal income against Sri P. Nageswara Rao, formerly Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise (Enforcement), Nizamabad presently Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nellore – Accused Officer placed on his defence before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Hyderabad – Enquiry conducted – Charged Officer found not guilty of the offence – Further action dropped – Orders – Issued.

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ABSTRACT PUBLIC SERVICES – Prohibition & Excise Department – Allegation of acquisition of assets disproportionate to the known sources of legal income against Sri P. Nageswara Rao, formerly Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise (Enforcement), Nizamabad presently Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nellore – Accused Officer placed on his defence before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Hyderabad – Enquiry conducted – Charged Officer found not guilty of the offence – Further action dropped – Orders – Issued. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REVENUE (VIG.V) DEPARTMENT G.O. Rt. No. 298 Dt.18.02.2012. Read the following:- 1) D.G., ACB Lr. C. NO.94/RCA-VKI/2006, dt.26.02.2008. 2) Sri P. Nageswara Rao, AC P&E, Representation, dt.15.03.2008. 3) Memo No.18295/Vig.V(2)/2006-9, dt.06.10.2008. 4) Secretary, TDP, Hyderabad Lr.Dis.No.S/29/2011, dt.16.12.2011. -o0o- O R D E R: On the allegation of acquisition of assets disproportionate to the known sources of income against Sri P. Nageswara Rao, formerly Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise (Enforcement), Nizamabad and presently Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nellore, the appropriate investigating agency has registered a case in Crime No.12/RCA-ACB-VJA/2006 under Section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and investigated into the matter. In the reference 1st read above the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau while furnishing his final report, recommended to prosecute the Accused Officer in a court of law for acquisition of disproportionate assets and to initiate departmental action against him on the allegation that he failed to obtain prior permission from the competent authority and failed to intimate about acquisition of certain assets. 2) In the reference 2nd read above, the Accused Officer has submitted a representation and requested the Government to consider and drop further action in the case. 3) Government, after careful examination of the contents of the representation submitted by the Accused Officer placed him on his defence before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Hyderabad to conduct enquiry in respect of this disproportionate assets case and to submit report, vide reference 3rd read above. 4) In the reference 4th read above, the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Hyderabad has furnished enquiry report stating that the value of assets found in the possession of the Charged Officer is Rs.38,85,221.48 Ps. The expenditure of the Charged Officer and his wife comes to Rs.29,62,974/-. The income of the Charged Officer comes to Rs.1,21,37,650/-. After deducting expenditure, likely savings of the Charged Officer comes to Rs.91,74,676/-. The assets in possession of CO and his wife are only Rs.38,85,221.48 ps. Therefore, the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings held that there are surplus savings. Hence it was concluded that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the charge with which the charged officer has been tried. In the result, the Charged Officer was found not guilty for the offence punishable under Rule 3 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 r/w Rule 2(b) of the A.P. Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Rules, 1989 framed under the A.P. Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Act, 1960 as amended in 1993. 5) Government, after careful examination of the matter in detail, have decided to drop further action against Sri P. Nageswara Rao, formerly Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise (Enforcement), Nizamabad and presently Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nellore as the allegation of acquisition of assets disproportionate to the known sources of his legal income has not been proved and accordingly hereby drop further action against him. P.T.O.::2:: 6) The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P., Hyderabad / the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau, A.P., Hyderabad shall take necessary further action in the matter accordingly. ( BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH ) ASUTOSH MISHRA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT To Sri P. Nageswara Rao, Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nellore Through: the Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P., Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P., Hyderabad. The Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau, A.P., Hyderabad. Copy to:- The Secretary, A.P. Vigilance Commission, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Guntur. The Revenue (Excise-I) Department. File/SF/SCs. // FORWARDED :: BY ORDER // SECTION OFFICER