Telangana High Court
K.Kanaka Srinivas vs State Of Telangana on 3 April, 2025
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.9308 of 2025
ORDER:
Heard Sri A. Tirupathi Goud, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing
for respondents. Perused the record.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
was appointed as a Police Constable (Civil) No.2307 with effect
from 02.01.1992 and he rendered unblemished record of
service throughout till he was placed under suspension vide
C.No.27/A5/PR/2011, D.O.No.805/2011, dated 27.04.2011
with effect from 15-4-2011 on the ground that the ACB officials
booked a criminal case against the petitioner and others vide
Cr.No.05/ACB-KNR/2011 in accepting an amount of
Rs.15,000/- as bribe from one Jakkula Saraiah for doing
official favour for not to impose fine and not to book any case
against Auto trailers and other vehicles carrying the sheep and
goats from Arnakonda village to Choppadandi for selling and
purchasing them in the market.
2(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that vide judgment dated 20.11.2018 in C.C.No.75 of 2015, the
petitioner was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a
period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/-. In view of
the aforesaid Judgment, the petitioner was dismissed from
service on the ground that he was were convicted on the
criminal charge. The petitioner had challenged the said orders
of the Trial court before this Court in Criminal Appeal No.3112
of 2018 and this Court was pleased to render Common
Judgment in Crl.A.No. 3112 of 2018 along with 3104 and 3105
of 2018 on 03.10.2023 holding that there is no evidence on
record before the Trial Court, the question of convicting the
accused in a criminal trial is not sustainable in the eye of law
and consequently allowed the Criminal Appeals and set-aside
the punishment imposed by the Trial Court. After allowing the
criminal appeal, the petitioner made a representation on
27.09.2024 seeking reinstatement the petitioner into service,
but no action has been taken by the respondents.
2(ii) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is entitled for reinstatement in view of Memo
No.2598/Ser.C/65-2 dated 25.09.65 as it was clarified that if,
however, a Government employee is removed or dismissed or
reduced in rank, solely on the ground of conduct which led to
his conviction on a criminal charge, without complying with the
requirements of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India or
Rule 19(2) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules and if
his conviction is eventually set aside by the appellate court, or
by the High Court, in revision, then the order of removal,
dismissal or reduction in rank, as the case may be, cannot
stand and that order will have to be reviewed.
3. On the other hand, learned Government pleader on
instructions submits that the charges against petitioner were
proved and conviction also taken place.
4. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned
counsel for respective parties, though the trial Court convicted
the petitioner in C.C.No.75 of 2015 on 20.11.2018, but the
same was challenged in appeal, and this Court allowed the Crl.
Appeal on 03.10.2023. So, without going into the merits of the
case, the respondents are directed to consider the
representation of the petitioner dated 27.09.2024 along with
above said CCA Rules and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law, within a period of eight (08) weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in
this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
_____________________________________
NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J
Date:03.04.2025
BDR
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
DATE: 03.04.2025
BDR
