Telangana High Court
Dr. T. Padma vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 December, 2023
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
WRIT PETITION No.24441 OF 2010
ORDER:
(per the Hon'ble Shri Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti) The petitioner approached this Court seeking the following relief:
"to issue Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the services of the petitioner as Adhoc District Judge to preside over Fast Track Court by the impugned order Roc.No.1971 / E1/ 2006 dated 4.5.2010 without considering the representation of the petitioner dt:3.6.2010 and 23.7.2010 as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of constitution of India and for a consequential order to quash the impugned order Roc.No.1971/E1/2006 dated 4.5.2010 by directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner forthwith with continuity of service and all consequential benefits viz., payment of arrears of salary and other benefits and to pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper."
2. K. Hima Bindu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y. Sai Sankalp, counsel appeared on behalf of Mr. Y. Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
2 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010
3. Brief facts:
Petitioner was enrolled as an Advocate in the year 1993 and after having practised for some time, she was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor in June, 1998. Pursuant to notification issued by respondent No.1 dated 12.08.2002, petitioner made an application for post(s) of Adhoc Judges for Fast Track Courts and she was placed at Sl.No.8 and appointed as District Judge on Adhoc basis vide G.O.Rt.No.1798, dated 06.10.2003 and a communication of provisional selection was issued on 14.10.2023. Petitioner underwent training and was posted as II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court, Medak at Sangareddy), vide Notification No.1058/B.Spl., dated 22.10.2003. As per terms and conditions, petitioner executed agreement dated 23.10.2003 for a period of two (02) years till 31.03.2005 for the tenure of appointment on contract basis.
3.1. Respondent No.1 vide Roc.No.4335/E1/2000, dated 02.05.2005, extended the tenure of the Fast Track Courts 3 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 beyond 30.04.2005 until further orders. Respondent No.1 vide G.O.Rt.No.430, dated 27.03.2006, extended the tenure of the Fast Track Courts Judges for a period of five (05) years from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2010.
3.2. A letter was addressed to the petitioner dated 01.12.2006 directing not to dispose of any cases on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court), Medak, Sangareddy, until further orders.
Petitioner's services were terminated vide G.O.Ms.No.180, dated 29.12.2006.
3.3. Petitioner preferred writ petition challenging orders of termination vide W.P.No.1554 of 2007. This Court by order dated 22.08.2008 was pleased to quash the impugned termination order dated 29.12.2006 with a direction that the petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits such as reinstatement into service with resultant benefits such as salary and emoluments including arrears with effect from 29.12.2006, (i.e., from the date of the order of termination till date of reinstatement).
4 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 3.4. Pursuant to the decision of this Court, petitioner was reinstated on 02.07.2009 with continuity of service and back wages by respondent No.2 vide order dated 23.06.2009. Term of 108 Fast Track Courts came to an end by 31.03.2010.
3.5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was issued the impugned order by respondent No.2 in ROC.No.1971/E1/2006, dated 04.05.2010, wherein it was stated that the High Court had decided not to extend the tenure of appointment as Adhoc District Judge, beyond 01.04.2010 and was directed to hand over charge immediately to the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nizamabad and get herself relieved. 3.6. It is pertinent to take note of the fact that petitioner while discharging her duties as II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Medak at Sangareddy in sessions case i.e., S.C.No.376 of 1996 delivered the judgment convicting 15 accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. An appeal Crl.A.No.977 of 2005 5 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 preferred against the said judgment, was allowed by a Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court by setting aside the judgment.
3.7 It is trite to take note of the fact that one of the Hon'ble Judges of the Division Bench observed in the order as follows:
"Learned Judge convicted 15 accused and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment without evaluating the prosecution evidence, after recording contentions, in one para of 7 or 8 lines. It is not safe to assign Sessions cases, unless her performance with other cases is evaluated."
3.8. Registry placed the matter before the Hon'ble Chief Justice and the same was directed to be placed before the Fast Track Court Committee. The said committee observed that the judgments delivered by the petitioner in S.C.Nos.376/1996, 164/2000, 383/2002, 223/2003, 232/2003 and S.C.No.366/2004 were found most unsatisfactory. A resolution was passed terminating the services of the petitioner in the meeting held on 20.11.2006, resolution is as follows:
6 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 "Hence, it is resolved that the services of Smt. T. Padma, II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Medak at Sangareddy, be terminated." 3.9. It is submitted that petitioner filed W.P.No.1554 of 2007 challenging the termination of her services as Adhoc District Judge vide G.O.Ms.No.180, dated 29.12.2006. By order dated 22.08.2008, a Division Bench of this Court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner performed her duties most diligently and only in one case she passed such orders and the Administrative Committee had taken a decision not to extend her services. That the Division Bench reinstated the petitioner into services is ample proof that she has been discharging her duties diligently and that her services should have been extended with consequential benefits. Hence, appropriate relief be granted.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent supported the order of non-extension of services of the petitioner as 7 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 the petitioner's entire record was considered by committee of Fast Track Judges and it was resolved not to extend her services. It is also submitted that subsequently a notification was issued for the recruitment of Fast Track Court Judges on Adhoc basis. The petitioner made an application pursuant to the said notification and she was unsuccessful (in the year 2010).
6. Heard learned counsels, perused the entire record, the order and counter affidavit filed.
7. Considered the rival submissions, the High Court decided not to extend the tenure of appointment of the petitioner by order dated 04.05.2010. Discontinuation and relieving of the writ petitioner does not amount to dismissal, removal or termination. Petitioner was on contract basis and was discontinued and relieved without any stigma. Term of 108 Fast Track Courts came to an end by 31.03.2010. An office note was placed regarding extension of term of petitioner beyond 31.03.2010, i.e., from 01.04.2010 to 30.06.2010. When the Registry placed the 8 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010 matter before the Hon'ble Judges of Administrative Committee for extension of term the committee in its meeting held on 19.04.2010 resolved not to extend the tenure of petitioner. It is also a fact that the Administrative Committee of the Hon'ble Judges decided not to consider her representations dated 03.06.2010 and 23.07.2010 for continuation of her services as Adhoc District and Sessions Judge. We do not find any grounds for interference in the order of non-extension and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ _____________________________ ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J Date: 28.12.2023 PLP 9 CJ & JAK, J W.P.No.24441 of 2010