K.V.V.Satyanarayana Murthy, vs The Central Power Distribution ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2062 Tel

            HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

               WRIT PETITION No. 13516 OF 2009

     ORDER:

Challenging Memo dated 26.06.2009 issued by the

Chairman and Managing Director, Central Power Distribution

Company of A.P., Hyderabad, petitioner is before this Court.

2. It is stated that petitioner was originally appointed

as Helper on 04.05.1990 and thereafter, promoted to the posts of

Assistant Lineman, Lineman, Sub-Engineer and Additional

Assistant Engineer. While he was discharging duties as such at

Uravakonda, he was trapped by ACB on 31.10.2003 and was

placed under suspension by Memo dated 31.10.2003. Police also

filed C.C.No. 13 of 2004 on the file of Additional Special Judge for

SPE and ACB Cases, Hyderabad. Subsequently, he was reinstated

into service vide letter dated 22.06.2006 and posted under the

control of Superintending Engineer, Operation, Nalgonda. After

trial, petitioner was convicted for the offences under Sections 7

and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act. Petitioner is stated to have preferred Criminal

Appeal No. 686 of 2009. Vide order dated 24.06.2009 in

Crl.A.M.P.No. 1499 of 2009, this Court suspended execution of

sentence and directed him to be enlarged on bail. While so, on the

basis of judgment of ACB Court, the 1st respondent issued the

impugned memo dismissing him from service. Now the grievance

of petitioner is that in view of order of the High Court, pending

Criminal Appeal, he is entitled to continue in service for, there is

no provision / Regulation for automatic dismissal on conviction

and sentence.

3. The 1st respondent filed counter-affidavit. It is

stated that in terms of Regulation 10(5)(a) of APSE Board

Employees' Discipline and Appeal Regulations as adopted by

APCPDCL, the disciplinary authority has issued orders duly

dismissing petitioner from service from the date of pronouncement

of judgment in C.C.No. 13 of 2004. It is further stated that

Government issued Memo dated 26.11.2001 based on the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.C. Sareen v. CBI

Chandigarh (2001(5) Supreme 437), wherein orders were issued

to dismiss the accused officer from service immediately on

conviction even if appeal filed by him is pending. The said Memo

was adopted by AP Transco in T.O.O.GM(IR-Per) Ms.No. 45, dated

22.05.2002 which are applicable to employees of APCPDCL. It is

further stated that High Court has suspended sentence only but

not conviction, hence dismissal order passed by the disciplinary

authority is in accordance with Rules and Regulations in vogue.

4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, Ms. Nikitha for

Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TS TRANSCO

and Government Pleader for Services -II for 2nd respondent.

5. Evidently, impugned Memo was issued consequent

to judgment in C.C. No. 13 of 2004 against which Criminal Appeal

is pending. This Court by order dated 24.06.2009 in Crl.A.M.P.No.

1499 of 2009 suspended sentence only but not conviction. When

the subject issue is pending consideration in the Appeal, this

Court cannot go into the merits or otherwise of the impugned

memo.

6. The Writ Petition is therefore, disposed of with

liberty to petitioner to approach this Court to avail further

remedies, if any after disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 686 of 2009.

No costs.

7. Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if

any shall stand closed.

-------------------------------------- NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J

06th September 2023

ksld