High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 226 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to declare that G.O.Ms.No.342, Genl. Admn (Ser-C) Department, dt- 4-8-1997 in so far as dealing with not considering the cases of the persons for promotion to the next category who were imposed with punishment of Reduction of Time Scale / with holding of rncrements as illegal and arbitrary hence liable to be set aside and further declare that applicant entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of lnspector of Police basing on her seniorityand eligibility and without reference to G.O.Ms.No. 342 dt.4.8.1 997 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. SRINIVASA RAO MADIRAJU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER i I i i i i I I I I I I ,F€._::.+.* r) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION lTRl No.1753 of 2 oL7 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed for the folLow,ing relief "...to declare tlnt G.O.Ms.No.342, Genl. Adntn. iSer C) Deperlment, dt: 4 8 1997 in so far as dealinq uith rtot cortsideing the coses of the persorLs .for promot{on to the next category tuho ruere r,.posed utith. punishment of Reduction of Time Scale / wtth h.oldtnq of increments as iltegal and arbitrtiry hence liabk: to be set aside and furlher deciar,: that apphcar entitled to be con-sidered for promotiort to the posl of Inspector of Police basing on lrcr seniority a nd eligibilitg and u.tithout reJbntnce to G.O. Ms.No.342,dt.4.8.1997 and pass ..."

2. Heard Sri M. Srinivas Rao, learned corrnsel for the petltioner arrd learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner su bmits that the petitioner u.orked as WSI of Women Police Strttion, Warangal, during 2010. While the petitioner was r',or-king, certain allegations \vere made against her and a charge memo, dated

28.09.2OO5 was issued to her stating that shr exhibited gross dereliction of duty and indulged in corrupt prirctices. And the \ I l 2 petitioner submitted her explanation stating that the charges framed against her are motivated and there is no truth in any of the allegations made against her. Hor.l,ever, without considering the explanation of the petitioner, Sub Divisional Police Ofhcer, Narsampet, was appointed as Enquiry Ofhcer by proceedings dated 09.12.2OO5. 3(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity in the enquiry. However, the Enquiry Officer submitted report, dated

30.03.2007 holding charge Nos. 2, 3 & 5 are held proved. In pursuance of the report of the Enquiry Officer, a Show-cause notice, dated 20.05.2007 was issued to the petitioner calling for her explanation for imposing punishment against the applicant. The petitioner submitted a representation requesting to drop all further proceedings including proposed punishment against her. Without considering the same, the 2"d respondent issued orders in C.No.36/PR/2010, RO No.453/2010, dated

14.08.2010 awarding the punishment of dismissal from service against her. The said orders are communicated to the petitioner by the 3.d respondent by proceedings, dated 16.08.2010. v7 I I i I l I I i 3 3(ii) Learned counsel for the petitioner firrther submits that the petitioner liled an appeal to the respond:nts requesting to set aside the punishment imposed against her. The l"t respondent considered the representation of the petitioner and issuecl G.O.Rt.No.602, dated 26.O4.2OI i modifying the punishment of dismissal from service impos:d against the petitioner to that of "RTSP by (3) stages for (3) lears with effect on future increments and pension". The sa d orclers were communicated to the petitioner by proc,redings, dated O I .06.20 1 1 of the 3'd respondent. The petitione - u'as allotted to Khammam district by proceedings, dated 02.06.2011 of the Inspector General of Police. The petitioner mad: representation to the respondents requesting to transfer h:r to Warangal district. Accordingly, she u,as transferred to V/ar-angal district on 26.06.2012 and presently the petitioner is worl<ing as Traffic Sub Inspector in Warangal district. 3(iii) Learned counsei for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is one of the senior most Sub Inspector, eligible and entitled to be promoted to the post of Inspector of Police, but she vr,as not considered for promotirn. Accordingly, prayed to allovr the Writ Petition. 4 o

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents submitted that the Ofhce of the DIG of Police, Warangai, addressed a letter, dated 25.06.20 18 to the Commissioner of Police, Waranga,l, as follows: "Dr. D.Vijaya Laxmi, WSI of PoLice(Ciuil), Warangal Range u.tho utas included in the promotion pctnel of SIs ft to oct as Inspectors uide referdnce 1 to 4" cited, is promoted os Inspector of Police (Ciuil) in tenns of Rule 1O(a) of 7SS&SS Rules, 1996 uith immediate effect and this promotiotl ordered is purely in temporary basis and the SI promoted is Iiable to be reuerted to the louer post at onA t[me u.)ithout notice attd tuithout assigning onA reasons thereof and aLso subject to the outcome of the sLPS/ wP/ sAS/ oAS/ RPs/ CAs etc., if anA pending before Courts/ Tibunals. 'l'he promotion as [nspr. of Police(Ciuil) on ad-hoc basis, is subject to receipt of Hon'ble High Court orders dt.23.06.2016 in W.P. No.2OO89 of 2O16, as her luniors utere aLreadg prontoted cts Inspectors.l Consequent on her promotion as Inspector of Police, she is posted to Warangal Commissionerate. She is directed to join in her neu.t place of posting u.tithin 1 5 dags from the date of receipt of this order of promotion, failing uhich necessary oction tuill be token tuithout any pior notice occording to Rute 11[b] of Telangano State ond Subordinate Seruice Rules 1996 r/LU Gout. Cir. Memo.No.10445/ Ser'D/ 2O11 GA [Ser D] Dept-, dated: 01.06.2011 uhereii the Gout. claified that a person promoted sholl join in the promoted post uLithin 15 days from the date of receipt of the order of promotion. If an emplogee LDho does not join the post tuithin the stipulated ,ry 5 tirne or euades jotn th.e post bA proceeding on Lea rc, sh.ctll lose his promotion ight for curent panel year and tirc nante of the atndidctte sholl be ptaced before the next DI,C .fbr consideralion in the next gear panel subject to auailtbititg oJ' uacancA, tf lrc is olhenuise eligible [i.e., one time onl11), but not dunn11 subsequent pantzl gears "

5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for respondents, and also as seen from the cause tLtle, at the time of filing the Writ Petition, the petitioner rvas ag€d 52 years and no\\r, \\'e are it 2025. A perusal of the said lett,_'t- goes to show that the petitioner uras already promoted as Ins,pcctor and she was posted at Warangal Commissioner, but she aited to comply with the dire<:tion of the Inspector General of Pclice. In vieu,of the same, nothing survives in this Writ Petition.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed ol. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if alv, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SDi- K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR .I, SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department' Secretariitt' T S 2. The Deputy lnspector c"n6Joiiiorice Warangal.Range' Warangal District ?H::f ?Jt"{ltt'"^I[lsxugl!fl tl$1i11ffi f"l[.Liqr-,-"r-", ; ii;; 66, t"-Cp FOn nOile ,iigh Cou'l fcr the Stat(. cr Telangana at o o Hvderabad [OUT] Two CD CoPies Hyderabad ' ' IM KS tk--!tffi=mw. -.-::?-lEr.,-+'EEFl+re=E:- -=-ax:.ir -a -'. ----r----.. -, I HIGH COURT DATED:2010612025 ORDER WP(TR).No.1753 of 2017 .,tE ..,rai c 10 sEP 206 t ^t DrspostNc oF THE WR|T PET|TION ITR) WITHOUT COSTS