Mr. Mohd. Abdul Jahangir Od Hg 2669 vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 898 Tel

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                 AND
    THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI



              WRIT APPEAL No.67 of 2021

JUDGMENT:   (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


     The present writ appeal is arising out of an order

dated 03.02.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in

W.P.No.45900 of 2018.           The said order was a common

order passed in W.P.No.20636 of 2017 and other connected

matters, which includes W.P.No.45900 of 2018.

     The facts of the case reveal that large number of

Home     Guard    personnel        were      discontinued          by    the

Department either on the ground of misconduct or on the

ground of physical fitness or for some other reason,

without following the principles of natural justice and fair

play. Some Original Applications were preferred before the

Andhra    Pradesh     Administrative           Tribunal        and      some

petitions were preferred before this Court also.                         The

Original Applications preferred before the Andhra Pradesh

Administrative Tribunal have been transferred to this

Court. This Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh
                                 2




v. P.Prasad Rao1 as well as in the subsequent cases i.e.,

W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and batch decided on 08.06.2018

has laid down certain parameters for reinstating the Home

Guard personnel subject to physical fitness test. In some

of the leftover matters, a common order was passed and all

the counsel appearing in the matters consented for a

common order in terms of the judgment dated 08.06.2018

rendered by this Court in W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and

batch, which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.14162 of 2019,

dated 26.07.2019. Meaning thereby, the appellant herein

has also agreed for a common order and in those

circumstances, an order has been passed, which is under

challenge.

         Learned counsel for the appellant has argued before

this Court that the appellant was removed on the ground of

misconduct.

         In the considered opinion of this Court, the cases of

removal on the ground of misconduct have also been

considered in the earlier round and in all the cases a

1
    2012 (1) ALD 76 (DB)
                              3




common order was passed for conducting physical test by

putting the writ petitioners on notice in advance and the

physical test is to be conducted based upon the relaxed

standards. As the appellant himself has consented for the

common order as passed in W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and

batch decided on 08.06.2018, the question of interference

with the impugned order passed by the learned Single

Judge does not arise.

     The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.

     The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.




                           ______________________________________
                             SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ




                           ______________________________________
                              ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J


24.02.2022

vs