Saturday, 18, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Director General, Railway ... vs Jadhav Babu Rao, Maharastra State
2022 Latest Caselaw 6303 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6303 Tel
Judgement Date : 1 December, 2022

Telangana High Court
Director General, Railway ... vs Jadhav Babu Rao, Maharastra State on 1 December, 2022
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili, Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                              AND

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

                  Writ Appeal No.984 of 2015

JUDGMENT : (Per Hon'ble Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)
        This Writ Appeal is filed by the appellants assailing

the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in

Writ Petition No.3316 of 2000, dated 01.06.2015.


2.      Heard Ms. L. Pranathi Reddy, learned Standing

Counsel for the Central Government, appearing for the

appellants; and Mr. J.M. Naidu, learned counsel for the

respondent.

3. Learned Standing Counsel for the appellants

contended that the respondent has responded to a

notification for the post of Constable in Railway Protection

Force (R.P.F.), and he was selected and sent for training;

while the respondent was undergoing training, it has come

to the notice of the appellants that the respondent was

involved in a criminal case in Sessions Case No.54 of 1992;

the respondent has suppressed about his involvement in

the said criminal case; though the respondent was

acquitted later by the competent criminal court in said ::2:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_984_2015

criminal case, the said fact was not informed to the

appellants at the time of selection; accordingly, the

appellants have discharged the respondent form service

vide proceedings dated 22.02.2000 under Rule 67.2 of

Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987; aggrieved by the said

order of discharge from service, the respondent approached

this Court by filing Writ Petition No.3316 of 2000; and a

learned Single Judge of this Court, vide order dated

01.06.2015, was pleased to allow the Writ Petition by

setting aside the orders of discharge dated 22.02.2000, and

directed the appellants to take the respondents into

service.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants further contended

that the learned Single Judge ought to have remanded

back the matter to the appellants at least so as to enable

the appellants to consider the case of the respondent in

terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

Avatar Singh vs. Union of India1; and therefore, prayed

this Court to pass appropriate orders in the Writ Appeal by

setting aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge

1 2016 (8) S.C.C. 471 ::3:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_984_2015

in Writ Petition No.3316 of 2000, dated 01.06.2015, and to

allow the Writ Appeal.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the

respondent contended that the Hon'ble Apex Court, in a

judgment reported in Pawan Kumar vs. Union of India2,

has considered the facts and circumstances of the case

and directed the Railway Protection Force to reinstate the

petitioner therein by applying the principles laid down by

the Hon'ble Apex Court in Avatar Singh (1 supra); and

therefore, prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders in

the Writ Appeal.

6. This Court, having considered the rival submissions

made by the parties, is of the considered view that the

present Writ Appeal can be disposed of by directing the

appellants to consider the case of the respondent in terms

of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Avatar

Singh (1 supra) and pass appropriate orders within a

reasonable period of time, preferably within a period of two

(02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

It is needless to say that the respondent is also at liberty to

submit a detailed representation to the appellants, and

2 Civil Appeal No.3574 of 2022, dated 02.05.2022 ::4:: AKS,J & RRN,J wa_984_2015

thereafter the appellants shall give an opportunity of

hearing to the respondent before passing any orders.

7. With these observations, the Writ Appeal is disposed

of. No costs.

8. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if

any in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

_____________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J

Date : 01.12.2022 Ndr

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter