Head Constabte - 2629, Bth Battalion, TSSp, Kohbapur. 1. GopalReddy.?nd ! Others, S/o. Thimma v. Naresh Yadav, S/o ! .famgg@rOqr, ng'ed abo

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar appearing on behalf of the Assistant Government plead behalf of the respondents. Nerelta, learned counsel petitioners and the learned er for Home, appearing on

2. Th e Detitton r su nder: DTave r AD r ached h co rt se krn q ".... to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of , "* "r r;::: :: : "}"::::ffi :HTI:H: Me mora ndu m the claim of the petiti( 'n"tt for reversion from the rank of Head constabre ,o constable vide Rc'No.A1- Estt/ 7237 /2021, o,oo"t" 04'08'2021' Rc.No'A1- Estt/1237/2021, 0.""0 24'oB'2021' Rc'No'A1- Estt/1237/202r, ou't"o 74'og'2027' Rc'No'A1- Estt/t237/2o21, dated 0B'70'2027' even though the respondent authorities sim irarry situated r"*"",*i"i,#:T1i" j':r"'':j[ Head Constable .. ,t Rc.No.A1l16/ppr/2o1s.; ,r::li: ,l** ,::: 18.02.2020 as illegal, arbitrary un6'rr**,],;;;"J ;; accordingly set aside the same with a consequentiat direction to respondents the ctaim of the peririoners for reversion ;_^: io"t'o"t the category to HC to PC in view of the law raid down the Hon'ble High Court in W.p No.37146 of 2013 and 39, 280 of 2O13 and orders issued in ;: re.. 1 SN,J Vr.P No 754 2022 favor c'similarly situated persons vide orders Rc.No.A1/16/ PP'fi2O .B-20 (D.O. No.26612020) dated 18.02,2020 in the interesl of justice and to pass such other order o. crders as thrs Hr I'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circL ris :ance of the case. "

3. The :e s;e of the petitioners, in brief, is that tre petitioners have been i Dpointed as police Constables (fSSp) rr the year 2018 and plc:;ted to 8th Battalion, TSSp, Kondapur-, R,R. District. As per the -relangana State police Rules categcry 7(b), the petitioner:; ,a'e eligible for conversion from TS Spe cii,rl police to Armed Reser i,e (AR) Constables after completion oF I0 years oF service. Sub: ;-.quently, the petitioners have been pr:tmoted to the post c,f I r?ad Constables in the year 202: but lat:er sought voluntary re, ersion to the post oF Constable due to personal hardships. ll(',vever, their request for reversion was; r,,:jected by the 4th r:spondent vide the impugned orde- ,Lc.No.A1- Estt/7237 /20 I 1, dated 04.OB.2OZI, Rc.No.A1-Estt,, 1,i37 /202t, dated 2l. )B.2OZt, Rc.No.Al-Estt/t237/2021, dated 14.Og.2O2'-., Rc.No.Al-Estt/L23712021, dated )B IO.2O2L, without ass qning proper reasons and 'me-el,/' citing administrative grounds though the similarly situatec persons belong to 1:he same Battalion were allowed for rever;ion yrde order datecl 3 )03.2019. Aggrieved by the said reje,:ti,>n order, 3 SN,J W.P.No 754 2022 the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 4 PERUSED THE RE CORD: (A) The relevant Dortion of the imDuqned Memo vide Rc.No.Al resDondent N 7 /202L, ed O4. oa.2021 of the etition er Nos.1 a nd2 herein is extracted hereunder: "With reference to the letter 2"d cited, the following HCs of this unit have submitted their applications requesting to revert them as PCs due to their family/personal problemsl

1. Sri D. Venkatesh, HC 939 2. Sri Gopal Reddy, HC 2629 3. Sri K. Shekar, HC 2630 In this regard, the applications of the above (03) HCs requesting to revert them as pCs are hereby considered and rejected on administrative grounds, as per reference 1'r cited. Acknowledge the receipt of this Memo. Commandant 8th BN TSSP, Kondapur, R.R. District To The above individuals through OC'He, Coy. (B) The releva t oorti noft he imouqned Memo vide Rc.No. A1-Estt 1237 I 202L. d a d24.Oa.20 21 of the 4 SN,J W.I .)Jo 754 2022 resDondent-N?.4 addressed to the oetitioner Nlr'3 herein rsextracte d h ereunder: "W ih reference to the letter 2nd cited. tht: folrowing HCs of t'ri ; Lrnit have submitted their applications -€questing to reverl. t -em as PCs due to their family/personal o-otrlems. l. Sri N. Sathish Reddy, HC 2505 llri K. Shashank Reddy, HC 2617 :i. iiri B. Ramesh, HC 2633 lr t - is regard, the applications of the alrove r'0ii) HCs requesi:iic to reveft them as PCs are hereby considi:rerd and rejectec r rr administrative grounds, as per referen:e 1'r cited. r\(:k rowledge the receipt of this Memo. Sd/-xxr Corrr -r;rn da nt 8th BN TSSP, Kondapur, R.R, D strict. To The abrr,ze ndividuals through OC'HQ'Coy. (C) ][e _.relevant oortion of the imougned Memo .No. A l-EsttlL237 /2021, dated 14.O9.2021. of the resDondent_N,).4 addressed to the .4. herein is extracted-hr ! reu nder: "'y'/:h reference to the Ietter 2nd and 3'd citerl, the I'ollowirg i lCs of this unit have submitted their applic,rtions requesting to revert them as PCs due tl family/lrt:r ; rnal problems. lliri V. Naresh Yadav, HC 2553 l, 2. :iri R. Srinivas, HC 2784 I I I Y 5 SN,J W.P.No 754 2022 I In this regard, the applications of the above (02) HCs requesting to revert them as PCs are hereby considered and rejected on administrative grounds, as per reference 1st and 4th cited. Acknowledge the receipt of this Memo. Sd/-xxx Commandant 8th BN TSSP, Kondapur, R. R. District. To The above individuals through OsC 'B' & .F, Coys. (D) The relevant Dortion of the imouon ed Memo vide Rc.No. A1-Estt/12 3712O2L. dated O8.1O.2O2 of the resDonde t No.4 addressed to the oetitioner N .5 herein is extracted hereunder: "With reference to the letter 2nd to 5th cited, the following HCs of this unit have submitted their applications requesting to revert them as pcs due to their family/personal problems. Ran k G. No. Name Slsri sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 Present place of working F Coy F Coy HC HC HC HC HC 553 2631 2628 2590 262t Mahesh J. Srinivasulu K. Pradeep Reddy Hq Coy M. Mahesh Yadav HQ Coy B. Narasimha HQ Coy In this regard, the applications of the above (05) HCs requesting to revert them as PCs are hereby considered and 6 SN.J V P.No 754 2022 re]€cl€: cite J administrative grounds, as oer refe rence 1sr ,,,cknowledge the receipt of this Memo. Sd/- xxx Com mandant Brh BN TSSP, Kondaour, R,R. District. Tc The ,rllc ''e individuals through OsC F & He Coys (E) Tire relevant oortion of the order_re.latinq to similarlv s_i!r lated persons yr'de Rc. No. A1 / 1 6 / pt,T/ 20 1 g- 20 dat d 1t l.02.2O2O of the respondent No.4 extracted hS:eunder: "With r..f I rence to the orders 1sr cited, the rollow nE police Conslab]e_s v/or, I promoted as Head ConstabE una tnuy tro _r have reported for dury, as HC on 23.02.2019 fVo*,-tf.luy have :;ut,mitted representatic)r ! ,ith reference 3,d cited requesting [o ,"u.rt.. tt em as Police Constable n view of family problems. -- ' ''

1. Sri Ctr, !,ekhar, HC 3L7 2. Sri !,. tS - ravan Kumar, HC 357. .. , 1, this r:g ard with reference to TSSP Head office mer.to 2.d cited the Co r rr ittee was formed viae reference- +;-,,itu-j ""ia counseied rhr: 3-ou" Head Constabl", thern the benefits availrrt,le in TSSp on continuation as Head Constab e. ";-;;;ised .Despite ,)f .he counseling the above Head Constables have ?presenrationi vide reference oa' .i,"O-rt",irs :#j3f:::"::.ir . u,dL r ey are nct wrllino to work as HC and requested to cor siJeT ror reversion as p ) ice C-onstable in view or ]ariiri!"rouren.,=. As per 'tS Sp Head Office vide reference 2nd r:ite,d a constab e as probationer Hea J - onstable can be .ururtuJ"l -poiice per hrs willingne;s 7 W.P.No SN,J 754 2022 Hence. Sri Ch. Sekhar HC 317 and Sri V. Shravan Kumar, HC 357 are reverted to their substantive post of police Constable with immediate effect, at their o*n ."qrlri -in view of family problems. Hence the OC HO, reversion of the above compliance. HCs directed to send the date of Police Constable and report Clerk is directed to revise the pay of above individuals in the substantive rank of police Consiable inl'-.iuirn their pay accord ing ly. Commandant, 8th Bn TSSp Kondapur, R. R. District To The above individuals through OC 'He, Coy (F) D The relevan toortion OJ he commonorder oft he d 4 4 as di 2 W.P.No.37 146 of 2013 and 39280of 2013 tnD No.7 is extra cted hereu nder: rticu arDara "7. Learned counsel for the first respondent in the Writ Petitions/a pplicants relied on a decision in- G.Boyanna,s cas.e (1 supra) wherein it is held thus: ([ara 7j "It is relevant to note at this point that the petitioner was not promoted to the post of Junioi Assistant but was appointed by transfer. In fact. he could not have been so promoted, as the post of Process Server is not in the feeaer'categorf ioi promotion to the post of Junior Assistant. In this view of the matter, it is doubtful whether the act of the petitioner in seeking reversion from the post of Junior Assistant can be said to be one of relinquishment of his right to be considered for ( I 8 wP\(, SN,J 1\l )o)') Drcrr:,tion. However, this is how the respondr-'nts [;,; ,;;;i.J-thl matter and the petitioner- als] th s .i,ioi ,j Li--i[. rn",."rore, for the purpose 9r. ;,;,,; it shall be presumed that the petitione'rr ii,i" ,,,itn"J hii right for promotion I t .eversion to the post of Process Serv€ s,:uQ - l-e ,, T Tl :r above decision has no application to the facts of the prese 1t case, But, on the ground of discriminiltir:rn' the Writ Pe:it,rns are liable to be dismissed lt is not ln lispute before .n !; Court that as per proceedings dated 21 1( 2005' some c f :he Head Constables were reverted anrl por;ted to work a s r clice Constables in the District Armed F es srve in their rt:s )ective Units Therefore' there should not be any discrlrlin:tion from one person to another person Hence' the irnp:r,lned order needs no interference by tnis Court' Howev:r the cases of applicants have to be corrsi'lered if they fit rrto 40olo quota' Therefore' we make rt clt':ar that afteri-r:v:rsion,theapplicantscannotbeimmediatelysentto Armed Reserve but their cases have to be the t)ist -lct for posting to District Armed Reserve if they consil:r:d the 40olo quota meant for Police Constables of come w:hin APSP.,' DISCUSS-IJIN AN D CONCLUSION : It s lre specific case of the petitioner that petitioner's 5. request fcr reversion from the rank of Head Constatlle to Police Constable \/as rejected by Respondent No'4 vide llroceedings Rc.No.Al 'E.s t /1237 /2021, dated 04'08'2027 ' Rc No'A1- Estt/ 723i I 2t i] 1, dated 24.O8.2027, Rc' No'A1 -Estt/ 7 237' 2027', dated 14.Og.2O2l-, Rc.No.A1-Esttl1237l2O2L, dated 08 1'0' 2021' even though the r-espondent authorities had considerec axd accepted & 9 SN,J W.P.No 754 2022 similar requests for reversion from the rank of Head Constable to Police Constable to similarly situated individuals, vide order dated 18.02,2020. In C.No. 17UA1l2019 (D.No. L45/20t9), as well as to the petitioners who had approached this Court by filing W.P. Nos. 37146 of 2013 and 39280 of 20t3. However, in the present case, the petitioner's request for reversion from the post of Head Constable to police Constable was rejected, with a mere intimation stating that the request could not be considered on administrative grounds, as per the instructions issued by the Head Office to Respondent No.4.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner places reliance on the Common Order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.p. Nos.37146 of 2Ol3 and 39280 of 20L3, and contends that the petitioner herein is also entitled for the similar relief as extended to the petitioners in the present writ petition, in the right of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court.

7. Learned Assistant Government pteader appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute the passing of orders under similar circumstances in W.P.No.366O9 of 2024 and batch dated 28.02.2C.25. l0 SN,J W.I'.lio 754 2022 Learnercl \ssistant Government Pleader for Horre, placing

8. reliance on t re counter affidavit filed on beha lf of the respondents, particular, paragraph No.B contends l:hat the petitioner w,as :pDointed as Poiice Constable in February, 2018 and complet(rc only three years of service. For reversion to Police Constabl r (AR) (Men), a minimum of 10 years 01' service is required and the petitioner, in his representation subrritted to the respondenl office, requested reversion due to f'arrrily and personal prc,bl( rns/ and the petitioner had not mentiorred that he was se€]1.:ir (l reversion for Armed Reserved conversion. Therel"ore, the :etitioner is not entitled for the r-elief as prayed for in the pres( nt writ petition. But howe er since the said reasons state I rn tne counter amia the Impuqne d Memo of the 4th resDondent ref-legt_in proceedin gg__ _ Rc.No.Al -Estt/ 1237 / 2o21. dated o4.o.a.2o2L. Rc. No.A1-Estt_.,/_ 1237 /2()21, dated

24.OA.2O2!, R( .No.A1- Ellttlt237 /202t L4- .2(J21, Rc . No.Al- EsttlL237 l2 dated 08.1O.2O21 ,' and the saic Iryrpugoed ' Proceedinqs or ly indicate administrativE grounds thiri; Court opines that Ll-re same is an afterthought developed tt improve the case of tn-- -espondents and therefore the said ple as cannot be taken intc, c< nsideration by this Court for adjudication of the present case SN,J W.P.No 754 2022 9. A bare perusal of the record indicates that Respondent No.4 rejected the petitioner' request without assigning any specific reasons, merely stating that the request of the petitioner from Head Constable to Police Constable could not be bonsidered due to Head Office instructions issued by the Respondent No.4 on administrative grounds though the similar relief had been extended to similarly situated persons, who made a request for reversion from Head Constable to police constable as per the Common Order of the Division Bench of this Court and the observations thereunder dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.P.Nos.37t46 of 2013 and 39820 of 2013 and similar such relief had been extended to the petitioner in W.P.No.36609 of 2024 and batch, vide orders of this Court dared 28.02.2025.

10. Therefore, this Court opines that the request of the petitioners for reversion from the rank of Head Constable to Police Constable has to be reconsidered by the 4th respondent in accordan'ce,r tor .law duly taking into consideration the observations of the Common Order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.P. Nos.37146 of 2013 and 39280 of 2013 (referred to and extracted above) within a reasonable period by the 4th respondent herein. t2 SN,J W.P.flo 754 2022

11. TAKING TNTO CONSIDE RATION: a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the ca se, b) The submissions made by the learned r:ounse! appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learneri Government Pleader for Home appearing on beiralf of the respondents, c) The fa ct that similar relief had been extetrded to the similarly situated individuals, who rnade a reque;t for reversion from Head Constable to Police Constable by the respondent No,4 vide orderu; dated 30.03.2O19 and, d) The o)servations made in the Common Order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24,A3.2OL4 passertr in W.P.No.37L46 ot 2O13 and 39820 of 2013, e) The order dated 28.O2.2O25 passed in W.P. No. 36609 of 2024 and batch. f) The fact as borne on record that the impugned memc vide proceedings Rc.No.A1-Esti:/ t237 I 2O21, dated O4.O8.2O21, Rc.No.A1-Esttl 1t237 /2021, dated r24.O8.2O21, Rc.No.A1-Estt/1237 /2021, dated L4.O9, LO2L, , Rc.No.A1:Estt/.L237 l2O2L, dated 08.10. 1021, of the respondent No.4 addressed to the petitioner is bereft of reasons. The 'writ petition is allowed. The inrlrugned Memorandum vide proceedings Rc.No.A1-Estt / 1237 I 2O2lt dated il4.08.2021, Rc.No.A1-Estt/1237/2O2tt, dated I I I l3 SN,J W.P.No 754 2022 24.OA.2O21, Rc.No.A1-Estt/,-2:37 /2O2L, dated 14.Og.2f,2:-, Rc.No.A1-Estt/1237/2OZt, dated 08.10.2021, issued by the respondent No.4 is set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the request of the petitioners for reversion from the rank of Head Constable to police Constable in accordance to law duty taking into consideration the observations of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24-3-2014 passed in W.p. Nos. 37146 of 2013 and 39820 of 2013 and also the fact as borne on record that similar relief had been extended to similarly situated persons vide proceedings of the 4th respondent Rc.No.A1l16/ PPT/20I8-20 (D.O. No.266/2O2O) dated

18.O2.2O2O (referred to and extracted above) and pass appropriate reasoned speaking orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and duly communicate the decision to the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed To, I Itl LA-- SD/.A DEPUTY . PRATHIMA REGISTRAR /fTR.UE COPY/I SECTION Olii.'* l $'*mtft$ffifidmruil[#r HIGH COURT DATED:02105t2025 ORDER WP.No.754 of 2022 CC TODAY til'z :, {\1E SI4 14: 1 ! JUN 2025 (: () '.:) l,t il,\' ALLOWTNG THE WRIT PETITION WITHOU'T COSTS \r \.)) t ^