The High Court · 2025

Petition under kticle 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, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order declaring the action of Respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension beyond the prescribed period of two years with effect from 17.1.2023 vide Memo No.SE/OP/Sec-bad/JAO/ADtt//F.SUS/D.No.17471 22-23 dt.18.01.2023, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to G.O. f\rls. No.86, GAD dt.8.03.1994, besides being violative of Articles,'14 and 16, t9(t Xg), 21 of the Constitution of lndia, consequently direct the 1'r respondent to reinstate me in service in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petitiol under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1'r respondent to consider my representalion d|.22.5.2024 for reinstatement into service as otherwise petitioner stands to suffer serious hardship and irreparable loss and injury. Counsel for t he Petitioner: SRI N. MANOHAR Counsel for I he Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES - ll Counsel for lhe Respondent Nos.2 to 4: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, S.C. FOR TSSPDCL The Court m,rde the following: ORDER @Eir ,... I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RA"'ESHII/AR RAO WRIT PEIITION No.21558 of 20.25. ORDER: This Writ Petition is hled under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "...to issue on appropiate Wit, Order or Direction, more particularlg one in the nature of a Wit of Mandomus declaing th.e action of the respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension beyond the prescibed peiod of tu)o Aedrs u-'ith effect from 17.01.2023 uide Memo No.SE /OP /Sec.bad /JAO / ADM / F.SUS/ D.No.1747/ 22-23, dated 18.01.2023 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, uiolatiue of the pinciples of natural justice and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.86 GAD, dated O8.03.1994, besides being uiolatiue oJ Article 14, 16, l9(l)(g) and 27 of the Constitution of India, corusequentlg, direct tLLe 7't respondent to reirlstate the petitioner into seruice the interest of justice and pass... "

2. Heard Sri N. Manohar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Services - II appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, learned Stalding Counsel for Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4. 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whiie the petitioner u.as working as Sub-Engineer in the respondent - Company, the 3.d respondent had issued an lmpugned order vide MerrLo No. SE / OP I Sec.bad / JAO / ADM / F.SUS / D.No.l747 122-23, dated lB.Ol.2O23, placing the petitioner under suspension with effect from 17.O1.2O23 on the ground that he had allegedly demanded and accepted bribe. Consequr:ntly, a case in FIR No.02/RCT-CRl2023, dated

17.Ol.2O'.1,3 was registered against the petitioner by the ACB Officials zLnd no charge sheet is filed as on date.

4. Lea-ned counsel further submits that even after lapse of two yearsr, no steps were taken by the respondents to review the impu;3ned suspension order. Further, as per G.O.Ms.No.86 General l.dministration (Ser.C), dated 08.03.1994 issued by the Governmcnt, the orders of the suspension shall have to be reviewed at the end of every six months and the reviewing authority should take a decision regarding the continuance or otherwise of the employee concerned under suspension. Hence, learned c,runsel prayed this Court to direct the respondents to review tht: suspension order of the petitioner, dated 7a.O1.2023 arrd to reinstate the petitioner into service. B.-ry ..t "n /// .,,, /' /./ 3

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court, dated 29.02.2024 in W.P.No.5069 of 2024, and prays this Court to pass a similar order in the present writ petition also.

6. The said submission is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for respondents.

7. The relevant portion of the order dated 29'02.2024 in W.P.No.5O69 of 2024, is extracted hereunder: t \ o5. In uieu of the submission made bg learned counsel for the respectiue parties, tuithout going into the mertts of the case, this Wit Petition is disposed of uith a direction to respondent No.S to reuieta the suspension order of the petitioner, dated 09.03.2023 as per G.O.Ms.No.B6 General Administration (Ser.C), dated 08.03.1994 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with laut, as expeditiouslg as posslble, preferably uithin a period of four (04) uteeks from tlre date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate a copA thereof to tle petitioner.." B. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, and for the reasons alike in the order dated 29.O2.2O24 in W.P.No.5O69 of 4 2024, without going into the merits of the case, this writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.l to review th,: suspension order of the petitioner, dated 1g.O 1 .2023 as per Ci.O.Ms.No.86 General Administration (Ser.C), dated 08.03.19!)4 ar-rd pass appropriate orders, in accordalce with law, as e;rpeditiously as possible, preferab$ rvithin a period of four (04) ,veeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and comntunicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. There shall be no ordr:r as to costs. Misc ellaleous petitions pending, if an1., shall stand closed ! NorE: That the direction at paragraph No.B of the order da ted 25.07.2025 in W.p. Nb.21558 of 2025 is corrected and substituted as Respondent No.l" as per the orders of Hon,ble court dated 09.09.2025 in l.A. No.2 of 2025 SD/. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR This anended order shall substitute the earlier order which has already been dispatched on 06.08.2025 SDI A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR q //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Superintendent Engineer, Telangana State Southern power Distribution Uompar.y Limited, Secunderabad

2. One CC to SRI N. IVIANOHAR, Advocate [OpUC] 3. Two CC;s to GP for Services-ll, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderat ad. [OUT]

4. One CC to SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY, S.C. for TSSPDCL tOpUCl 5. Two CD Copies MP t \ HIGH COURT DATED:2510712025 09.09.2025 lp SEP 2tl25 \r,',\ ORDER AMENDED WP.No.21558 of 2025 DISPOS!NG OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT GOSTS { \