Telangana High Court
N. Raju, vs The Director General Of Police, on 6 December, 2022
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
W.P. No. 8359 of 2018
Between:
N.Raju
... Petitioners
And
The Director General of Police and others.
... Respondents
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 06.12.2022
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : yes
may be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be
marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : yes
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to
see the fair copy of the Judgment? : yes
____________________
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
WP_8359_2018
2 SN,J
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
W.P. No. 8359 of 2018
% 06.12.2022
Between:
# N.Raju
... Petitioners
and
$ The Director General of Police and others.
.....Respondents
< Gist:
> Head Note:
! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri G.Ravi Mohan
^Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Labour
? Cases Referred:
WP_8359_2018
3 SN,J
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
W.P. No. 8359 of 2018
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Government Pleader for Labour.
2. This writ petition is filed to issue an order, direction or
writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus
declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing
the orders of the Tribunal in O.A.No.1344 of 2010, dated
04.10.2012 by treating the petitioner's service on par with the
other persons who were appointed in pursuance of the
notification issued in the year 2005 and passing the impugned
order dated 11.09.2017 and in so far not implementing the
order by not fixing the pay of petitioner on par with
employees appointed in 2005 in pursuance of notification of
2005 as wholly illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the
respondents to implement the orders of the Tribunal dated
04.10.2012 by fixing the pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 2006 and
to add yearly increments and to pay the difference of such
fixation.
3) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:
WP_8359_2018
4 SN,J
a) The respondent issued paper notification for
appointment to the post of stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police
Constable (civil) APSP 2005. The qualifications required for
the post is SSC. The petitioner applied for the same. The
written test was conducted on 21.08.2005 and results were
published on 09.10.2005.
b) The petitioner was selected and sent to medical
examination at Osmania Hospital on 28.11.2005. But the
petitioner was not sent for training as he was involved in
criminal case. The S.C.No.334 of 2005 was referred to Lok
Adalath at M.S.J., Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar and the same was
settled amicably and that the petitioner was acquitted. The
same was disclosed at the time of filing the application.
c) The total vacant posts are 426, but 358 candidates were
sent to training. On 27.01.2006, again 20 candidates were
sent for training. Therefore, the petitioner approached the 2nd
respondent vide application dated 28.01.2006. The 2nd
respondent was informed that due to involvement in criminal
case, his name was deleted from the selected list.
d) Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed O.A.No.616
of 2006 before the Tribunal and the same was disposed of on
WP_8359_2018
5 SN,J
06.10.2009 directing the respondents to examine the case of
the applicant and pass appropriate orders. In view of the
orders of the Tribunal, the petitioner filed application before
the respondents. The 3rd respondent passed orders on
20.01.2010 cancelling the provisional selection of the
petitioner.
e) Against the action of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner
filed O.A.No.1344 of 2010 before the Tribunal and the same
was allowed on 04.10.2012 directing the respondents to
appoint the applicant to the said post as per notification dated
04.04.2005. As per the order dated 04.10.2012, the 3rd
respondent issued orders on 28.10.2013 appointing the
petitioner as Police Constable (civil). The petitioner was
allowed to complete his probation period w.e.f. 19.10.2015,
but the Tribunal directed the respondents to appoint the
petitioner as per notification dated 04.04.2005.
f) Against the orders dated 28.10.2013, the petitioner
filed W.P.No.20026 of 2017. During the course of arguments,
the 3rd respondent filed counter stating that he is entitled for
notional seniority and promotion on par with his 2005
batchmates and hence, the said writ petition was closed. As
WP_8359_2018
6 SN,J
the respondents have not complied with the said order, the
present writ petition is filed.
4. The counter affidavit filed by the respondents, in
brief, is as follows:
a) On antecedents verification, the petitioner was involved
in Crime No.66 of 2005 under Section 354 IPC on the file of
Yacharam P.S., Ranga Reddy District on the complaint given
by one Miss Derangula Jyothi, D/o Narayya, aged 19 years
R/o Malkijiguda Village, a deaf and dumb girl on 10.08.2005.
Subsequently, the said crime was compounded in terms of
compromise before the Lok Adalath.
b) The notional seniority of the petitioner was fixed at
Sl.No.1262 on par with petitioner's batch mates and no
promotions were effected to their batch mates till date. A
letter dated 26.05.2018 was addressed to the 1st respondent
for further instructions to give annual grade increment w.e.f.
2006 and that the 1st respondent also addressed letter to the
Government on 29.05.2018.
c) The Government of Telangana vide Memo No.2406-
P/Ser-II/A1/2017, dated 20.08.2017 issued the following
instructions:
WP_8359_2018
7 SN,J
"The individual Sri N.Raju, PC-6936, Vanasthalipuram Traffic
PS, was initially denied appointment due to his involvement
in criminal offences, but based on Tribunal Order, he was
appointed duly assigning seniority from the date of his
selection. Since he was not Government servant from 2005
to his date of appointment, he is not entitled for his
increments or pay during that period. But since notional
seniority is extended from 2005, the individual is requesting
for notional fixation of pay on par with his batch mates.
Rules for notional fixation for existing Government Servant
when their seniority is revised, but they are silent about
fresh recruitment and they do not apply to new recruitment
as the very service itslf begins from the date of appointment
joining in service.'
d) The representation dated 11.04.2018 of the petitioner
was rejected vide memo dated 20.08.2017 and the same was
acknowledged by the petitioner on 24.01.2019. Therefore,
the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
PERUSED THE RECORD :
FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE :
5. The order dated 04.10.2012 in O.A.No.1344/2010
filed by the Petitioner on the file of APAT reads as
under :
Para 12 : " For the reasons stated under Point No.(i),
the O.A. is allowed setting aside the proceedings of the
3rd Respondent in D.O.No.129/2010/Rc.No.36/122/A1
/Cyb/05-2010, dated 20.01.2010. The Respondents
are directed to appoint the applicant to the post of
WP_8359_2018
8 SN,J
Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police Constable (Civil),
pursuant to his selection to the said post under
Notification dt. 04.04.2005, with all consequential
benefits, if he is otherwise eligible, within a period of 3
(three) months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order".
6. In pursuance to the orders dated 04.10.2012 in
O.A.No.1344 of 2010 the 3rd Respondent issued
Proceedings dated 20.10.2013 appointing the
Petitioner as Police Constable (Civil) w.e.f. 18.10.2013,
whereas the Tribunal directed the Respondents to
appoint the Petitioner to the said post in pursuance of
the Selection Notification dt. 04.04.2005 with a clear
stipulation that the Petitioner is entitled for all
consequential benefits if he is otherwise eligible within
a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the
copy of the order. Aggrieved by the inaction of the
Respondents in implementing the said orders,
Petitioner filed W.P.No.20026/2017.
7. Contents of the letter dated 11.09.2017 of the 3rd
Respondent issued in favour of the Petitioner reads as
under :
"Office of the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad
at Gachibowli vide D.O.No.1661/2017,
Rc.No.36/122/A3(A9)/Cyb/ 2005-17, dt. 11.09.2017.
WP_8359_2018
9 SN,J
In pursuance of the Government Memo No.
Rc.No.2406-P/Ser.II/A1/2017 of Home (Services-II)
Dept., TS, Hyderabad dt. 11.09.2017 Communicated by
C.O. Endt. Rc.No.33/E1/2017, dt. 11.09.2017 and in
compliance to the Hon'ble AP Administration Tribunal
orders dt. 04.10.2012 in O.A.No.1344/2010, is hereby
ordered to release the consequential benefits i.e.,
assigning notional seniority and promotion in respect
of Sri N.Raju, 6936 of Vanasthalipuram Traffic P.S.
Rachakonda i.e., of erstwhile Cyberabd on par with his
2005 batchmates, duly following the provisions of
General Rule-24 of Telangana State and Subordinate
Service Rules".
8. The W.P.No.20026/2017, dated 12.09.2017 was
disposed of as infructuous observing as follows :
"This writ petition is filed feeling aggrieved by
the inaction of the respondents in extending the
consequential benefits attached to the Stipendiary
Cadet Trainee Police Constable (Civil) APST -2005 in
pursuance of order, dated 04.10.2012, in O.A.No.1344
of 2010 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the
Tribunal').
2. At the hearing, the learned Government Pleader
for Services (T.S.) appearing for the respondents has
placed before the Court, (1) memo No.2406-
P/Ser.II/A1/2017, dated 11.09.2017, issued by
respondent No.4 - the Principal Secretary to
Government, permitting to release the consequential
benefits i.e., assigning notional seniority and
promotion to the petitioner on par with his 2005
batchmates; (2) another memo of even date issued by
respondent No.1 - the Director General of Police,
requesting respondent No.3 - the Commissioner of
Police, to implement the aforementioned memo; and
(3) proceedings in D.O.No.1661/2017
Rc.No.36/122/A3(A9) /Cyb/2005-17, of even date
issued by respondent No.3 ordering release of the
consequential benefits in respect of the petitioner.
WP_8359_2018
10 SN,J
3. Mr.G.Ravi Mohan, learned counsel for the
petitioner, has submitted that with the issue of the
aforementioned proceedings, the order of the Tribunal
stood complied with. 4. Hence, the Writ Petition is
disposed of as infructuous. 5. As a sequel to disposal
of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.Nos.24509 and 37368 of
2017 filed by the petitioner shall stand disposed of as
infructuous".
9. Counter affidavit in the present Writ Petition at
paras 20 to 24 read as under :
Para 20 : I further respectfully submit that the
implementation orders were issued vide
D.O.No.1661/2017, dt. 11.09.2017 of the
Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad and communicated
to the Respondent with proper acknowledge on
12.09.2017.
Para 21 : I further respectfully submit that the
notional seniority was fixed at Sl.No.1262 on par with
his batch J(2005) mates and communicated to the
respondent with proper acknowledge on the seniority
list and no promotions were given as promotions were
not effected to their batch mates till date.
Para 22 : Further it is respectfully submitted that a
letter was also addressed to Director General of Police,
Telangana, Hyderabad for further instructions to give
Annual Grade Increments w.e.f. 2006 vide this Office
letter Rc.No.E3/36/122/Cyb/2005-18, dt. 26.05.2018.
Para 23 : Further it is respectfully submitted that the
Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad also
addressed to the letter to the Govt. of Telangana for
further orders vide letter Rc.No.333/E1/2017, dt.
29.05.2018. Further orders are awaited from the Govt.
of Telangana.
Para 24 : It is respectfully submitted that the Govt. of
Telangana vide Memo No.2406-P/Ser-II/A1/2017, dt.
20.08.2017 have issued the following instructions :
"the individual Sri N.Raju, PC-6936,
Vanasthalipuram Traffic PS, was initially denied
appointment due to his involvement in criminal
offences, but based on Tribunal order, he was
appointed duly assigning seniority from the date
of his selection. Since he was not Govt. servant
from 2005 to his date of appointment, he is not
WP_8359_2018
11 SN,J
entitled for his increments or pay during that
period. But since notional seniority is extended
from 2005, the individual is requesting for
notional fixation of pay on par with his batch
mates. Rules for notional fixation for existing
Government servant when their seniority is
revised, but they are silent about fresh
recruitment and they do not apply to new
recruitment as the very service itself begins from
the date of appointment joining in service".
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION :
10. The counsel for the Petitioner specifically
contends that the petitioner's pay has not been fixed
till as on date on par with other employees appointed in
2005 in pursuance of notification of 2005 and the
yearly increments also had not been released to the
petitioner nor the difference of amounts due
consequent to fixation of pay on par with other
employees appointed in 2005 had been released to the
Petitioner and therefore the order of the A.P.A.T., dated
04.10.2012 passed in OA No.1344 of 2012 has not been
implemented in its entirety still as on date and the
relief prayed for by the Petitioner in the present Writ
Petition cannot be denied on technical grounds in view
of the fact that the Petitioner bonafidely believed that
WP_8359_2018
12 SN,J
the contents of the letter dated 11.09.2017 would
eventually lead to implementation of the orders dt.
04.10.2012 passed in OA No.1344 of 2010 by the
Respondents herein in its entirety and therefore the
Petitioner through his counsel submitted to the Court
that with the issuance of the proceedings dt.
11.09.2017 of the 4th Respondent, the order of the
Tribunal stood complied with and accordingly the
W.P.No.20026 of 2017 dated 12.09.2017 was dismissed
as infructuous. The Counsel for the Respondent on the
other hand contends that the filing of the present Writ
Petition by the Petitioner amounts to resjudicata and
therefore, the Writ Petition has to be dismissed.
11. A bare perusal of the contents of the Memo dated
11.09.2017 and para 2 of the order dated 12.09.2017
passed in WP No.20026 of 2017 and also paras 22 and
23 of the counter affidavit filed by the Respondents
(extracted above) clearly indicate that instructions are
awaited in the matter from the Government of
Telangana for release of Annual Grade Increments
WP_8359_2018
13 SN,J
w.e.f. 2006 to the Petitioner herein and therefore this
Court opines that in view of the fact as borne on record
that the order dated 04.10.2012 passed in OA No.1344
of 2010 has not been implemented till as on date by the
Respondents in its true spirit, in its entirety, in spite of
the proceedings dated 11.09.2017 issued by the 4th
Respondent, therefore, the plea of the respondent that
resjudicata applies in the present case is not
sustainable and the Writ Petition is therefore, allowed
as prayed for. The Respondents are directed to take a
decision in pursuance to Office Letter Rc.No.
E3/36/122/Cyb/2005-18, dated 26.05.2018 and
Rc.No.333/E1/ 2017, dated 29.05.2018 (referred to in
paras 22 and 23 of the counter affidavit filed by the
Respondents and extracted above) duly implementing
the orders dated 04.10.2012 passed in OA No.1344 of
2012 in its true spirit and pass appropriate orders,
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of the copy of the order and duly communicate the said
decision to the Petitioner. However, there shall be no
order as to costs.
WP_8359_2018
14 SN,J
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_________________
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
Date: 06.12.2022
Note: L.R.Copy to marked
b/o
kvrm
