Daniel v. Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 18 Jul 2002
- Bench
- PULLA KARTHIK
Outcome
Disposed of
case, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitloner to
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Having regard to the submissions made by learnerl counsel for the respective parties and without going into the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitloner to make fresh representation before the respondents redressing his grievance within a period…
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS to declare the action of the respondent in not considering the claim of the petitioner for treating the suspension period from 16.06'1999 to 13.06.2002 "as on duty" in view of acquittal in criminal case No.155/1999 dated ls.oT.2oo2bytheHon, bleJudicialFirstClassMagistrate, Banswadaand dropping of disciplinary proceedings is illegal arbitrary and unco nstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to treat the suspension period "as on duty" from 16.06.1999 to '13.06.2002 in view of acquittal in criminal case No.155/'1999 dated 18.07.2002 by the Hon'ble Judicial First class Magistrate, Banswada and dropping of disciplinary proceedings with includes arrears of pay and pension. all consequential benefits which IANO:1OF 2021 11e-"t Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pteased to ,n",respondents to treat the. suspension period ,,as on duty,, from 1 6 06 1999 to 1 3.06.2002 in view of acquittar in criminar case No.1 55i.r 999 dated 18 07 2002 by the Hon'bre Judiciar First crass Magistrate, Banswada and dropping of disciplinary proceedings forthwith by disposing of his appeal/representation dated 25.10.2017 in the interest of justice. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI AJAy KUMAR NERELLA Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES_II The Gourt made the following:
ORDER. -
lw ,>:,, ( THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA XARTHIK IIIRIT PETITION No.11875 OF 2021 ORDER: This Writ Petition is fileil under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "...1o issue a uit, order or direction more panticularlg one in the nature of Wit of MANDAMUS to declare the action of the respond.ent in not consideing the ctqtm of the petitioner for treating the suspension peiod from 16.06.1999 to 13.06.2O02 "as on dutg" in uieu of acquittal in Criminal Case No.155/1999 dated 18.07.2002 bg the Hon'ble Judicictl First Class Magistrctte, Bansluado and d.ropping of disciplinary proceedings is illegat, arbitrary and uncorustitutional and consequentlg direct the respondents to treat the suspension peiod ai on duty from 16.06.1999 to 13.O6.2OO2 in uiew of acquittal in Ciminal Case No.155/1999 dated 18.O7.2OO2 bg the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrqte, Bansluada and dropping of disciplinary proceedtngs with all consequential benefits which includes arears of pag and pension and to pass . . . "
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Nerella, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-lll for the respondents
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as Watchmen, he was suspended from duty w.e.f.
16.06.7999 in connection with news items published in Vaartha news paper. Subsequently, a criminal case was also registered against the petitioner uicle C.C.No.155 of 1999 on the file of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Banswada. However, the petitioner was reinstated into duty on 13.06.2OO2 arld the learned trial Court has also acquitted the petitioner from the criminal case uide l 2 wn I1875 2021 judgment, dated 18.07.2O02. Therefore, the petitroner has made a representation before the respondents on 2S.7O.2OlT requesting for treating thc suspension period i.e., from 19.O6. i999 to 13.06.2002 as on duty. However, no action has been taken by the respondents so far. Hence, learned counsel prays this Court to permit the petitioner to make fresh representation ttefore the respondents redressing his grievance and the respondents may be directed to consider the same and pass appropnate o.d..s, *ithin a stipulated lteriod of time.
Learned Governmcnl pleadcr for the respondents, while admitting the fact that the petitioner was acquitted from the criminal case uide judgment, dated B.O7 .2OO2, fairly submits that on receipt of representation from the petitioner, thc respondents will consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with lau .
Operative part
Having regard to the submissions made by learnerl counsel for the respective parties and without going into the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitloner to make fresh representation before the respondents redressing his grievance within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass ,1'- .\ \ 3 wp r r8?s IJri appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks therefrom and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. /ITRUE COPY// SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY T REGISTRAR AS SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, SC Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.
2. The Commissioner of SC Welfare Department, State of Telangana, Hyderabad
3. The District Collector, Nizambad District. 4. The Deputy Director, SC Welfare Department, Nizambad District. 5. The Diatrict SC Welfare Officer, Nizambad District.
One CC to SRI AJAY KUIVIAR NERELLA, Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES-|||, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTJ
Two CD Copies BSR BS g HIGH COURT DATED: 1110212025 '- sr4; € ,< o 2 0 FrB 2025 v n ,/ ORDER WP.No.11875 ot 2021 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS a OF ao 'lr{
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: case, this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitloner to
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 18 Jul 2002. The bench was PULLA KARTHIK.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.