Ramavath Nansng Naik v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of lndia praying thal in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of IMANDAIVUS by declaring the impugned Memorandum issued by the 4th respondent wherein rejected the claim of the petitioners for reversion from the rank of HC to PC vide Rc. No.A1-EstU 123712021 dated '10.08.202'l , even though the respondent authorities were considered the claim of similarly situated persons for reversion from the rank of HC to PC on their request vide orders Rc.No.A1/16/PPf2O18-2O (D.O.No.266/2020) dated 18.02.2O2O as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and accordingly Set aside Same with a consequential direction to respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for reversion from the category to HC to PC in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in w.P No. 37146 0f 20.13 and 39280 0f 2013 and orders issued in favor of similarly situated persons vide orders Rc.No. Al/16/PPf /2018-20 (D. , No. 26612020) daled 18.02.2020 in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section .151 CPC praying that in the c r )umstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Ccr l may be pleased to suspend the impugned crders issued vide Re.No.A'l-Rc lJ ,.A1- Esttl123l l2O2j dated 10i08/2021 with a direction to respondents to con:; ler the ciaim of the petitioners for reversion from the category to HC to PC in viel of the law laid down by the Honble High Court in W.P No. 37146 of 2013 and 392 t O of 20'l 3 and orders issued in favor of similarly situated persons vide orders R; No.A1116/ppf DOIB- 20(D.O. No.26612020) daled 18.O2.2O20 pending disposal of t e writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. AMARNATH Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.2552 OF 2()22 ORDER: Heard Sri M. Amarnath, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The oetitioner aDD roached the Court seekino Draver as under: "....to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS.by declaring the impugned Memorandum issued by the 4th respondent wherein rejected the claim of the petitioners tor reversion from the rank of H.C. to P.C. vide Rc.No.A1- Estt/1237/2021 dated 10.08.2021, even though the respondent authorities were considered the claim of similarly situateC persons for reversion from the rank of H.C. to P.C. on their request vide order Rc. No. A1l r5lPPr/2OtB-20, (D.O. No. 266/2020), dated L8.02.2020 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutiona I and accordingly set aside the same with a consequential direction to respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for reversion from the category to HC to PC in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P No.37146 of 2013 and 39280 of 2013 and orders issued in favor of similarly situated persons vide orders Rc.No. A1l 16/ ppT/2OlB-20, 2 SN.J W.P.No 2-t52 2022 - (D.O.No.26612020) dated 78.O2.2020 in t re interest of justice and to pass such other order or r rders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and pr rper in the circumsta nce of the case."

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is tl at the petitioner has been appointed as Police Constable on 18.10.2013 and posted to the Bth Battalion, Kondapur, Hyder; bad. As per the Telangana State Police Rules category 7(b), tr I petitioners are eligible for conversion from TS Special police l( Armed Reserve (AR) Constables after completion of 10 yt ars of service. Subsequently, the petitioner has been promot€ I to the post of Head Constable in the year 202L but later s tught voluntary reversion to the post of Constable due to pe.;onal hardships. However, the request of the petitioner fo- reversion was rejected by the 3'd respondent vide the impugrr, d order Rc. No. Al/Estt/1237/2021, dated 10.08.2021, without , ssigning proper reasons and merely citing administrative c.ounds though similarly situated persons belonging to the same Battalion were allowed for reversion vide order dat( d 30.03.2019. Aggrieved by the said rejection order, the t 3titioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ p etition. I 3 SN.J W.P.No 2552 2022 PERUS ED T E RECORD 4. The imouoned Droceed inqs Rc.No.Al-Estt/ L237 I 2O21 dated 1O.O8.2O21 issued bv the Commandant. 8th BN TSSP, Kondaour, R.R. District is extracted hereunder: MEMO Sub:- 8th Bn TSSP - Representation of (02) HCs 1920 and 2750 of 'B'Coy requesting to revert them as PCs - Instructions - issued - Reg. Ref:- 1) Memo Rc.No.963/A3/2021, dated 22.07.2O2L of ADGP, TSSP Bns., Hyd., 2) Representations dated 30.O7.2O21 of HCs 1920 and 2-l50 of 'B'Coy received through Lr.C. No.03/B/Unwilling HC/2O27, Dt : 03.08.2021 of OC "B" Coy_of this unit. With reference to the letter 2nd cited, the following HCs of this unit have submitted their applications requesting to revert them as PCs due to their family/personal problems. 1 2 iV. Swamy; HC 1920 iR. Narsing Naik, HC 2750 r r S S In this regard, the applications of the above (02) HCs requesting to ievert them as PCs are hereby considered and rejected on administrative grounds, as per reference 1st cited. Acknowledge the receipt of this memo. ' Sd/-xxx commandant, 8th BN TSSP Kondapur, R.R. District To The above individua ls

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the subject issue in the present W.P. is squarely covered by the order of this court dated 02.05.2025 passed in 4 SN.J W f No 2552 2022 - W.P. No. 448 ot 2022 which duly referred to the I) vision Bench ludgment of this Court passed in W.P. No' 3714(; of 2013 and 29280 of 2013 on the subject issue and conter led that the petitioner herein is also entitled for the similar re i rf as granted to the petitioner in W.P. No. 448 of 2022.

6. The learned Assistant Government Pleac t appearing on behalf of respondents does not dil; r for Home rute the sa id submissions made by the learned counsel appear ng on behalf of the petitioner. DISC USSION AND CONCLUSION:

7. A bare perusal of the record indicates th: . Respondent No.4 rejected the petitioners'request for reversic PC without assigning any specific reasons, mer(rl r from HC to / stating that it could not be considered due to Head Office instr rctions issued by the Respondent No.4 on administrative grourr' s though the similar relief admittedly had been extended to sirr persons, who made a request for reversior ila rly situated from Head Constable to Police constable as per the Commc r Order of the Division Bench of this Court and the observati') rs the re u nder dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.P.Nos.37146 of 2l of 2013. It is also not in dispute by the re; t3 and 39820 rondents that similar such relief had even been extended to th€ petitioners in ) SN,J w.P.No 2552 2022 W.P. No.366O9 of 2024 and batch vide orders of this Court dated 28.02.2025.

8. Therefore, this Court opines that the request of the petitioner for reversion from the rank of Head Constable to Police Constable has to be re-considered in accordance to law duly taking into consideration the observatlons in the Common Order of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.P' Nos 37146 of 2013 and 39280 of 2013withinareasonableperiodwithoutreferencetoimpugned order dated 17.OB.2O2l issued to the petitioner' 9 Takinq into con ideratton (a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, (b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of the respondents, (c) The fact that similar relief had been extended to the similarly situated individuals, who made a request for reversion from Head Constable to Police Constable by the respondent No'4 vide orders dated 3O'O3'2O19 and' () SN,J \v I'.No 2552 2022 - (d) The observations made in the C,r rtmon Order of the Division Bench of this Court datec 24.03.2014 passed an W.P.No.37L46 of 2013 and 39820 t f 2013, The writ petition is allowed. The imgr tgned Memo vide Rc.No.ALlEsttlL23T/2O2L dated 1O.Ol3 2021 issued by the respondent No.4 is set aside. The rer; ,ondents are directed to reconsider the request of the I etitioner for reversion from the rank of Head Constat le to Police Constable in accordance to law duly taking into consideration the observations in the Dir ision Bench Judgment of this Court dated 24.O3.2OL4 pa ssed in W.P. No.37146 of 2O13 and 3982O of 2O13 (ref rrred to and extracted above) and pass appropriate reer: oned orders on the subject issue within a period of (2 ) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the orr er and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs, Miscellaneous applications, if any, pendi'l shall stand closed. :iD/. L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASS ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, The State c Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad. Telangana,

2. The Director General of Police, State of Telangana, La < iikapul, Hyderabad -t

3. The Additional Director General of Pohce, TSSP Battalions' Shouryabhavan' Jublihills, Gayatrihills, Hyderabad'

4.TheCommandant,8thBattalion,TSSP,Kondapur,RangareddyDistrict. 5. One CC to Sri trrl. Amarnath, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to the GP for Home, High Cou( for the State of Telangana' at Hyderabad[OUT]

7. Two CD CoPies TJ TKS -?d1 HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED:0611012025 I I ORDER WP.No.2552 ot 2022 g-rrtE S T t9 * 6 ttl ?0?0 -'; ;PiF'l * ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1{r ,\r\*