Thimmannagari Santhosh Reddy v. Rurar Deveropm"ni sut*tJriii ivo.i""d5i'-"soot)1

.....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction particurarry a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in continuing the petitioner No-1 herein under suspension after placing him under suspension vide order dated 2g-03- 2024 passed in Procgs. No. A1r233r2024 (zpp) and arso the action of the Sth respondent in continuing the petitioner No.2 herein under suspension after placing him under suspension vide Order dated . 28-03-2024 passed in No' A1181112024 on the ground that both the petitioners were arrested on 26-03-2024 in respect of Crime l'lo. 03/RCT-ACB-NZBI2O24, dated . 26-03-2024 registered by ACB authorities witl-out filing charge sheet/charge memo as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the judgrnent rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court of lndia in Ajay Kumar Chowclhary Vs. Union of lndia reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291 and also in violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of lndia an,l consequently declare that the respondents cannot continue the petitioners under suspension anymore and the petitioners are entitled for re-instatement from the date of lapse of 90 days of their suspension in the interest of justice. l.A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Uncer Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petitlon, the High Court may' be pleased to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners into service by suspending the Order dated . 284:;2024 passed in Procgs. No. Ali233l2024 (Z.PP) by the 4th respondent and Orcer dated . 28-03-2024 passed in No. 41/81'1/12024 by the 5th respondenl herein pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI T.P.ACHARYA Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR SERVICES - ll The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER I I ] €r :a -aJY ,7 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK ORDER WRIT PETITION No.696 OF 2O2s With the consent of both the parties, the Writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

2. This Writ petition, under Article 226 of the 2g.O3.2O24 passed Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue a Writ, Order or Direction particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4,r, respondent in continuing petitioner No.1 herein under suspe.rsion vide order, dated Procgs.No.Al/233/2024 (Zppl and also the action of the 5tL respondent in continuing the petitioner No.2 herein under suspension after plaiing hlm under suspension vide order dated 28.03.2O24 passed in No.Al/8I t/2024 on the ground that both the petitioners were arrested on ?921?!31 in respect ot crime No.03/RCr_ACB_ NZB /2024, dated 26.O3.2O24 registered by ACB authorities without filing charge sheJTcharge memo as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the judgme"nt rendered by the._Hon'ble Supreme Court of Injia "in Ajay Kumar Chowdhary v. Union of India reported in 2OiS-(Z) SCC 291 and also in violation of Articies 14, 16 arld 2t of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the respondents cannot continue the petitioners under suspension anymore and the petitioners are entitled for re-instatement from the date of lapse of 90 davs of their suspension...." a r) Heard Sri T.P.Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government pleader for Services-Il appearing for the respondents. I i I I I I i l ; . 2 '':'

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners subm.itted that the petitionr:r s while r,t'orking as MPDO arld Senior '\ssistant in Kamared,lv District arld Nizamabad District, respectively' a criminal case was registered against them by the ACR officials in Crime llo.O3IRCT-ACB-NZBl2024, dated 27 'O3'2024 under Secticn 7 (al of the Prevention of Corruption Act alleging tha-t they demanded and accepted bribe amount of Rs.8,000/- from one Sri Ravutha Bagaiah, Ex'MPO' Kamareddy, for doing an official favour' Basing on false allegation, 1-he petitioners were placed under suspension vide Proc.Rc.No.A1l233 12024 (ZPP)' Proc' Rc.No.A1/81 | I 2024, dated 28.O3.2024, issued by respondent Nos.4 and l5 respectively.. Learned counsel further submitted thattiildate.nodepartmentalproceedingshavebeeninitiated and no charlle memo has been issued against the petitioners' Learned cour:rsel also submitted that petitioner No'2 is due for re+.irement aed though suspension orders have been issued in the month ol March, 2024, so far the suspension orders have not been reviewed and hence, learned counsel for the petitioners prays this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to review the suspension orders issued against l I '1 ,; .r!; ( </ '-- - l:a{:,: r': ....'.if 3 \ t the petitioners in view of the law laid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of Indial.

5. On the other hand, learned Government pleader submitted that since one year has been completed from the date of issuance of suspension orders against the petitioners, the respondents will review the salne in terms of G.O.Ms.No.86, General Administration Department, dated

08.03.1994.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for respective parties and in view of the fact that as on today, no charge sheet is hled in the criminal case registered against the petitioners, this Court is of the view that it is appropriate to direct the respondents to review the suspension orders issued against the petitioners uid.e Proc.Rc.No.Al /233/2024 (Zpp), proc.Rc. No.A1l811/2024, dated 28.03.2024 by respondent Nos.4 and 5 respectively, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.g6, General Administration Department, dated Og.O3.1gg4 and in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar ' zots 1z'1scc 291 'I 4 i.:: Choudhary's case (supra), as expeditiously as irossible' preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a coPY of this order'

7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 'lhere shall be no order as to costs' Miscelianeous petitions if any, pending in this writ petition shall r;tand closed. I \ //TRUE COPY// SD/- T. TIRUMALA DEVI GISTRAR ^"'il.t]"' '' sEcrloN OFFICER I I To

4. 6 7 8 o \,V " 5 0 0^0 2 e' i i ; g, n ", The Principal Secretary. Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Secretariat' sift ;i iffi;iniut iivo""n ad - soci ozz' relansana state The Commissioner, pancnaiJiiaj inO nurat Devdlopment Department' H i, a v,i n n' s 1 f , H vg q 19b' ! - iil"t""J i The District Collector, tprn.'n'vlilniin6i t'lizamauao District' Nizamabad - ?fl: BIJ-," collector' Kamareddv District' (Panchavat Raj wirrs) Kamareddv - 503 111, Telangana State' The Chief Ex':cutive Oftrcer' Nizamabad District Nizamabad 503 001' The Chief Ex;cutive Officer, iia]"areOOy Oitt'itt Kanrareddv - 503 111' il,i,i,Ei'r't"?ip io'i< sravrcE's-ji, i6h corrt for the state rf relansana at Hvderabad. IfUT] lti".,"Cii iir i.i' ncHnnvn Advocate [oPUC] Two CD CcP es SA GJP t I HIGH COURT DATED:1010'112025 ORDER WP.No.696 o't 2025 ( ;! rdE STAIt,o 2 7 JAN il]( 'JL,l v a r oEsPA-tc DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS.