✦ High Court of India · 01 Apr 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 01 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
01 Apr 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,132 words

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ order or direction by declaring the proceedings of the. 3rd respondent bearing No. 4115712024-1 , dl. 1610112024, placing the petitioner under suspension with retrospective effect, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of constitution of lndia apart from void abinitio being without Jurisdiction and also law settled in case of Ajay Kumar chowdary vs. Union of lndia reported ia !015 (7) scc 291, through its secretary and another and in civil Appeal No.1912 of 2015, by setting aside the same and consequenfly direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances st'ated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the proceedings of the 3rd respondent bearing No. A115712024-1 , dt. 1610112024 and direct reinstatement of the petitioner into service, pending final disposal of the main W.P. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ABHILASH ASHRITH BOBB|L| Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMA.VARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRJT PETITION No.8473 of 2O25 ORDER: Heard Sri Abhilash Ashrith Bobbili, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-l for respondents.

2. This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the proceedings of the 3'd respondent bearing No.All57 12024-1, dated

16.Ol .2024 placing the petitioner under suspension with retrospective eflect.

3. Brief facts of the case are that while the petitioner was working as Tahsildar & Joint Sub-Registrar, Kaddam Mandal, she was falsely implicated in the ACB trap case oo lO.Ol.2024 on a false complaint of Sri Lashetty Rajanna of Kothamaddipadaga, Nirmal District, though the petitioner never demanded and accepted an illegal gratihcation from Sri Lashetty Rajanna of Kothamaddipadaga through Muti Chinnaiah, Dy. Tahsildar for doing ofhcial favour i'e- for registration of gift deed for Ac.O-05 (five) guntas of agricultural Iand in Sy.No.376/2 in name of Lashetty Rajanna, Ac.O-06 (six) guntas of agricultural land in the same Sy.No'37612 in the 2 .1 name of Sri Suresh, younger brother of Sri Lashetty Rajanna a",d Ac'o-24 (tr.ven[z four) guntas of agriculturar land in Sv.No. 373/2/2 in the name of Lashetty Rajanna. 3(i) It is the further case of the petitroner that based on the false complaint made by the complainant. a raid was conducted by the ACB officials on lO.Ol .2024 buL norhing was recovered from the petitioner and no phenolphthalein test was conducted since the petitioner did not demand or accepted any bribe amount and the complainant not approached the petitioner on the day. Thus, nothing can be attributed against the petitioner. The 3.d respondent has issued bearing No.Al /57 /2O2a-t, dated t6.Ot.2024 placing the petitioner under suspension with retrospective effect, which is bad in law proceedings

4. [e arned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Deputy Tahsilda5 Muthi Chinnaiah had filed W.p.No.2Za6S of 2024 aggrieved by the suspension order issued by the f,.a respondent on the ground that the 3.d respondent has no authoritlr to place him under suspension beyond the period of three months and the 2"d respondent has not approved the said .:.. -l 3 suspension order. On considering the rule position and also in similar circumstances, this Court granted interirn order in W.P.No.24597 of 2024, dated 20.09-2024 and suspended the impugned proceedings bearing No-Al 1.57 /2024-1, dated

16.O1.2024 issued by the 3'd respondent herein and directed to reinstate him into service forthwith. 4(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits the petitioner is also similarly situated person and made several representations i.e. on 27.06.2024, O9'O9'2O24 and hnally on O4.1I .2024 to the concerned respondents requesting to drop further action and to reinstate her into service, but no action hasbeentakentilldate.Hefurthersubmitsthatthepetitioner would submit a fresh representation by enclosing the copy of the order in W.P.No.27865 of 2024 and prayed this Court that the respondents may be directed to consider her fresh I t representation. and pass appropriate orders' 5 On the other hand, learned Government Pleader sought time to file counter. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel 6. for respective parties and without going into the merits of the t t n:, I 4 .t case, since the Petitioner representation along with the copy of the order of this Court in intending to file a fresh 1S W.P.No.2786 5 of 2024, this Court directs the petitioner to hle a fresh representation to the respondent authorities within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such representation being made by the petitioner, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of (06) six weeks therefrom. 7 . 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. //TRUE COPY// SD/.P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA D PUTY REGISTRAR f \7 SECTION OFFICER /\ iJ

3. 4. To r5. t

7. PSK. LS -D^e-p-a The Principal Secretary, Reven ue rtment, Secreta riat B u i ld ings, Hyderabad, State of Teianq ana -500022. The Chief Commissioner oT. Land.Administration, State of Telangana, N.ampally Railway Station Road, Hyderabad. The Collector and District Magisirale, Nirmil District. Nirmat. The C^o llector a nd District Ma! istrate, nO itiOaO Ciistrici,' ea it, Oro. 9n" 9Q to SRTABHTLASH ASHRIIH BoBBiLt, A;".-chJtoFutt L*g C9r to GP FOR SERVTCES-|, Hign Court foilirL Statiiorieiangana, at Hyderabad. IOUTI Two CD Copies - '' ----- I ) HIGH COURT DATED:01 10412025 ORDER WP.No.8473 ol2025 1nE S I.1 ao\,L 0 2 t4AY ?0?5 I ot 1-nrcHE0 t ((\ z a .li I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS o 0 2K

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments