THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.10721 of 2004
ORDER:
This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension by virtue of proceedings dated 01.02.1999 issued by respondent No.1 without any review and without paying any subsisting allowance as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Rule 53 of the Fundamental Rules and violative of principles of natural justice and to consequently direct the respondents to reinstate him into service with all attendance benefits.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as a Physical Education Teacher (PET) on 27.07.1987 in the National High School (Aided), Nagar Kunrool, Mahabubnagar District, in an unaided post. Subsequently, he was absorbed in aided post vide proceedings dated 11.02.1996 issued by respondent No.2. While in service, a complaint was submitted by 2 two persons, namely B. Narasimhuluy and P. Venkata Swamy, against the petitioner, basing on which he was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 01.02.1999 without prescribing period, a case in C.C.No.217 of 2001 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 read with 506 of I.P.C on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagarkurnool, and a Sessions Case vide S.C.No.108 of 1999 was registered for the offences punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C. and Section 3(x)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the file of the learned Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under the said Act. After trial, the petitioner was acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. by the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nagarkurnool, vide judgment dated 12.08.2002 in C.C.No.217 of 2001. So far as S.C.No.108 of 1999 is concerned, the same is pending 3 for trial as on the date of institution of the writ petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite several representations, he has not been paid any subsistence allowance nor he has been reinstated into service.
3. Respondent No.2 has filed a counter affidavit stating that while the petitioner was working as a Physical Education Teacher in aided post, he was involved in criminal cases, namely Cr.No.218 of 1998, Cr.No.18 of 1999 and Cr.No.19 of 1999, and in view of the criminal charges he was also sent to judicial remand from 05.05.1999 to 19.05.1999, as informed by the Correspondent of the National High School, Nagarkurnool, vide letter dated 11.08.1999. It is also stated that due to the involvement of the petitioner in the criminal cases, he was placed under suspension vide orders in Rc.No.139/99 dated 01.02.1999.
4. When the matter was posted on 05.01.2022, none appeared for the petitioner and the matter was 4 adjourned. Today also there is no representation for the petitioner. Heard the arguments of Smt. C. Vani Reddy, learned Government Pleader appearing the respondents.
5. As seen from the record, it is clear that the petitioner was involved in criminal cases, namely C.C.No.217 of 2001 and S.C.No.108 of 1999. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a Physical Education Teacher in unaided post and subsequently he was absorbed in aided post vide proceedings dated 11.02.1996. Since he was involved in criminal cases, the Management of the School suspended him after getting approval from the competent authority. According to the learned Government Pleader, she has no instructions whether the criminal cases registered against the petitioner ended in acquittal or are still pending as on date.
6. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 29.06.2004, directed the respondents to pay 5 subsistence allowance to the petitioner as per Rules. Further, even as per the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, basing on the criminal cases registered against the petitioner the management of the school being the competent authority has not initiated any disciplinary enquiry till date. Moreover, the petitioner has also not chosen to implead the school management as a party respondent to the writ proceedings.
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedies available under law after conclusion of the criminal proceedings.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 08.09.2022 JSU