Nearly a month after Supreme Court vacating the high court’s stay order on the suspension of senior IPS officer and former intelligence chief of Andhra Pradesh A B Venkateshwara Rao, the Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy government has cracked the whip once again.
The government decided to initiate disciplinary action against Venkateshwara Rao under Section 8 of the All-India Services Rules, 1969, after serving due notices on him. Orders to this effect were issued by chief secretary Neelam Sawhney on Saturday.
The chief secretary asked Venkateshwar Rao to submit a written explanation on the charges made against him by the Anti-Corruption Bureau within 15 days.
If he doesn’t submit a written statement or personally depose before the government within the due date, action would be initiated against him immediately.
In November last week, the Supreme Court lifted stay on his suspension by the state government pending inquiry into the allegations of corruption against him.
The SC gave the order after hearing a special leave petition filed by the Jagan Mohan Reddy government challenging the high court order revoking his suspension.
It may be mentioned that Venkateshwar Rao was suspended on February 8 this year for his alleged irregularities in procurement of security equipment from an Israeli company during the previous Telugu Desam Party regime.
The Jagan government, which entrusted the case to Anti-Corruption Bureau, alleged that the ex-intelligence chief had colluded with an Israeli defence equipment manufacturing firm RT Inflatables Pvt Ltd to illegally award critical intelligence and surveillance contract to his son Chetan Sai Krishna, who is the CEO of Akasam Advanced Systems Pvt Ltd.
The government also alleged that Rao had wilfully disclosed intelligence protocols and procedures of police to the foreign defence manufacturing firm, which was a direct threat to national security as intelligence protocols are standard throughout the Indian Police Force.
Rao challenged his suspension by filing a petition in the Central Administrative Tribunal on February 13. He contended that the suspension was politically motivated and was done based on frivolous grounds. However, the CAT on March 17 upheld his suspension.
Later, he moved the high court, which had given the judgement in his favour and cancelled his suspension in July. The AP government challenged this order in the Supreme Court.
