Lambu Ravi Teja vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 3719 AP

       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU

            WRIT PETITION No. 6754 OF 2021


ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader for Services-I.

The petitioner is before this Court seeking an order

about reinstatement into services pursuant to acquittal in the

Criminal Appeal on 01.04.2019. A copy of the order dated

1.4.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal 214 of 2018 is also filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that two other

accused, who were along with the petitioner were also

acquitted. Thereafter, according to the learned counsel for the

petitioner, they preferred representations, which were not

disposed of in time. Hence, they approached this Court,

which granted orders in the Writ Petitions mentioned in the

counter-affidavit from paragraph 14 onwards to consider

representations made. Ultimately, the Government took a

decision to reinstate the two other accused into service. In

the case of the petitioner, the same was not done. Learned

counsel for the petitioner argues by reading the counter-

affidavit in particular from page 14 onwards that the case of

the petitioner is merely entangled in correspondence without

any relief being granted to him. He points out that the earlier

orders passed by this Court dealing with the representations

of the co-accused are also reproduced in this Paragaraphs.

Therefore, he submits that petitioner should be given equal

treatment and not be disturbed. He also prays for an order.

Learned Government Pleader for services-I appears for

the respondents states that the acquittal in a criminal case

does not lead to automatic reinstatement. However, he also

submits that a decision has to be taken by the 1st respondent

and then the correspondence addressed would show that the

respondents are pursuing the matter and issue is still

pending before the 1st respondent. Therefore, he states that

petitioner is not entitled to an order as prayer for

reinstatement directly.

This Court after hearing both submissions notices that it

is a fact that the petitioner was acquitted on 01.04.2019. He

is also superannuated and is now retired from service. More

than two years have elapsed and a decision is not yet taken.

The counter-affidavit refers to the Judgments passed by

this Court in the Writ Petitions filed by the other accused,

pursuant to which they were reinstated into service. It is not

clear why the delay has occurred in the petitioner's case, Ex

facie it appears that the delay is unwarranted. Nevertheless,

in the interest of justice; this Court is of the opinion that the

following direction must be given:

The 1st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of

the petitioner's representation within a period of one month

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, keeping in view

all the facts and circumstances of the case. With these

directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

As a sequal, miscellaneous petitions if any pending shall

stand closed.

______________________ D.V.S.SOMAYAJULU,J Date: 23.09.2021 Issue cc by monday (B/O) Psr.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU

Writ Petition No. 6754 of 2021 Dated 23.09.2021

Psr.