Hanamandlu lati v. 1. State of Telangana

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 pteaseo to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ to declare the Proceedings vide c.No.280/A1|KBM ASF/2024 dated 20.11.2024 issued by the 2nd Respondent, not relieving the petitioner from the post of Police constable vide cr.No.398/2023 and not peimitting him to join as a School Assistant in pursuance to appointment orders dated og.io.2024 and 15.10.2024 issued by the Respondent No.3 is illegal and arbitrary, and, set aside the same consequently direct the 'l & 2 respondent to relieve the relieve the petitioner from the post of constable without reference to the rule 30(a) of TS SS Rules with a further direction to 3 & 4 to permit the fetitioner to join as a school assistant in pursuance to proceedings dt.Ogl.1ol2124 and relieve all the consequential benefits to which the petitioner is entitled to' lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may O9 fle3;10 to suspenotheProceedingsvideC.No.2B0lA1/KBMASF/2024dated20.11.2024 / issued by the 2nd Respondent and with a further direction to the 2nd respondent to relieve the petitioner from the services. IA NO: 2 0F 2024 Petition 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 Respondent No.3 and 4 not to fill up the post of School Assistant offered to the Petitioner vide appointment order dated 09.1 0.2 024 and 15.10.2024. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ALLIKA SURESH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3 & 4: GP FOR EDUCATTON The Court made the following: ORDER ,I l THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVA RAPU RAJESHWAR RAO l^,RIT PETITION No.357 03 0F 2024 ORDER When the matter is taken up for hearing, both the learned counsel had contended that the issue raised in this Writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated tI.02.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3682 of 2025 and therefore, the present Writ petition may also be disposed of following the said order. In view of the above submission, following the order dated

11.02.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3682 of 2025 and in terms thereof, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to issue the relieving order to the petitioner from the post of police Constable mentloning all the details with regard to pendency of the cases against him, forthwith. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /ffRUE COPY// I To, ECTION OFFIGER 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department' State of Telangana' Secretariat' , T#Hffintendent of Police' Kumaram g6ssrn fi5ifabad District 3. The commissioner u"o dii'"""ioili'Slnoot eaucation. Telansana, Hvderabad' Hvderabad. ifii[t'ffi fffi^T#',gffi [1tr-$#d;,*;j;- touTl (Annex copy of order dated 11 02'2025 in WP No'3682 ot 2025) L Two CD CoPies BN BS---- w I I HIGH COURT DATED:0610312025 ORDER WP.No.35703 of 2024 1t\ 6 SIA I6' e (o 1 B l{A-t', 2t['. o U \ rl DEspetcse.o DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I I 3< \ ----"-7 THE HON'BLE SRI .IUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.3682 of 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is frled seeking the following relief: '.-.-.to issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the /d Respondent in refusing to provide A No Objection Certificate and relieving the petitioner from the post of Civil Police Constable (l I l6I) despite his selection and appointment to the post of Junior Assistant as illegal and arbitrary. The time for joining the new post expires on 12.2.2025 in pursuance of the appointment order dated 4.12.2024 and the consequential posting order dated 12.12.2024. The refisal is without any conviction in pursuance to the registration of Crime No.136/24 and the f ling of a charge sheet before the competent criminal court thus violating Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is further prayed that this Honorable High Court direcl the 2nd Respondent to relieve the petitioner with proper relief and provide a 'No Objection Certifcate' for accepting the new employment as a Junior Assistant".

2. Heard Sri Maddela Ravinder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents. l 2

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows :- (i) The petitioner was recruited as a Civil Police Constable cln 09.7O.2020 under the 2nd respondent Commissionerate. On 30.O5.2O24, a case in Cr.No. 136 of 2024 was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 419 and 170 read with Section 34 of IPC, which were subsequently altered to Sections 341,384,4I9 and 170 read with Section 34 of IPC. The petitioner was arrested on 02.06.2024 and granted bail on 20.06.2024. Consequently, he was placed under suspension on 2O.O7.2024. While so, the Telangana State Public Service Commission issued a recruitment notification lor Group-IV Services for various posts on ot.12.2022. (ii) The petitioner submitted .an application for the post of Junior Assistant. Based on merit, the petitioner's case was considered for selection and he was asked to attend for the certificate verification with a 'No Objection Certiflrcate' from his current employer i.e., 2nd respondent. W 3 In July, 2024, the 2"a respondent issued a NOC to the petitioner to attend Certificate Verification for the Group IV post. (iii) On 04.12.2024, the 3.d respondent issued an appointment order to the petitioner and the petitioner has received the posting order on 12.12.2.204 for the post of Junior Assistant in the 3.d respondent Institution, wherein he is instructed to report within sixty days with all original certificates, On 30.72.2024, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent requesting for revocation of his suspension and for reinstatement. On 08.O1.2025, the petitioner has submitted another representation requesting to relieve him from his current employment so as to enable him to join in the 3.a respondent Institution. On one pretext or the other, the respondents have not issued the relieving order. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner 1S appointed for the post of Junior 4 Assistant in the 3.d respondent Institution. However, the 2"d respondent has not issued the relieving order to the petitioner and refusing to issue the relieving order is illegal and arbitrary.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon Rule 4 (d) of the Telangana State and Subordinate Senrice Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Service Rules), which reads as follows :- (d) No person who has been dismissed form a State or Central Government service or from the service . of Central or State Government undertaking or local or other authorities or who has been convicted by a court of law for an offence involving motal turpitude shall be eligible for appointment to any State or Subordinate Service.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not suffering from any conviction and he has not dismissed from service. Therefore, the petitioner has a right to seek relieving order. from the 2.d respondent. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the 5 writ petition by directing the 2"d respondent to issue the relieving order to the petitioner.

7. On 1O.O2.2O25, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents took time for getting instructions. Today, the learned Government Pleader produced instructions before this Court, wherein the 2nd respondent stated as follows :- ".... It is respectfullg submitted that the petitioner Si K.Sikanth, PC 11161 of this unit tuas accused (A1) in Cr.No.136/2O24 U/5s.384, 419, 170 read with 34 IPC registered at Sultan Bazar PS, Hgderabad Citq....". 4. Duing the course of inuestigation, it is reuealed that the accused Al:K.Sikanth is tuorking as Police Constable (Ciuil), G.No.11161 at Nagole Pg Rachakonda (Petitioner) u.tas remanded for judicial custod,g from 02.06.2024 at 151O hrs to 26.06.2024 at Central Prison, Chenchalguda, Hgderabad. Charge sheet uLas filed before the Hon'ble II ACMM Court, Nampallg, Hgderabad dulg prouing the Inuestigation as "Being a Police Constable, the petitioner, K.Sikanth, PC 11161 of this unit is inuolued in such criminal acts, bg ertofting the ualuables and demanding moneg from ciuilian posing himself as a Taskforce, uthich i.s intolerable 6 in tLLe disciplined Police force and he is puni"shable U/5s.384, 419, 170 r/w 34 IPC. The case is presentlg under CC.No.154O9/2024 at Hon'ble II ACMM Court, NampalLg, Hgderabad. 'Pending Tial' S.It is submitted that, the petitioner Sri K.Sikanth PC 11161 of Nagole PS of this unit is placed under suspension u.e.f. 02.06.2024 uide this office D.O.No.3134/2O24, Rc.No.259/O9-S/ 14/PR- 1/RCK/2024, dt. 20.07.2024 and his suspension peiod u.tas ertended for further peiod of (06) Month.s begond 02-12.2024 or till need for it ceases uide this office D.O.No.320/2O25, Rc. No.2S9/09- S/14/PR-1/RCK/2O24, dt. 18.01.2025 and he is still under suspension

6. It is respectfullg submitted tha\ the petitioner Sri K. Srikanth PC 11161 of Nagole PS of this unit is facing charges on the allegation of Unauthorized absent for dutg ond placed under suspension for his inuoluement in a Criminal Case and "departmental proceedings pending against him'. Hence his relieuing from the post of Police Corustable from this unit is not acceptable at this stoge as per ruIes on his neu selection as Junior Assistant post in M.JPTBCWREI Society under Prouiso of Rule 30 (a)(iii) of TG Subordinate Seruice rules." Y 7 B. Learned Government pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not entitled to seek relieving order from the 2.d respondent as per Rule 30 (a) (iii) of the Service Rules, which reads as follows :- (ii, in any other case, from the date of communication of such acceptance to the member orfrom such other date, not being earlier than the date on which he was last on duty, as the said authority may, having regarcl to adminis t rat ive exige nc ies, s pecifi : Provided that the resignation of a member of a serttice shall not be accepted dgainst whom disciplinary proceedings are instituted as per the provisions of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, applicable to the State of Telangana from time to time or investigation, inquiry or trial is initiated:

9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the above Rule 30 (a)(iii) is not. applicable to the case on hand, as there is no question of resignation in the instant case.

10. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of 8 the considered view that the 3'd respondent issued the posting order to the Petitioner on 04.12.2024 for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant' The petitioner has receivecl the appointment order on 12'12'2024' wherein he was directed. to report within sixty days with all the original certificates- Basing on the said appointment order, the petitioner made representations on 30 't2 '2024 and 08.01.2025 seeking relieving order from the 2"d respondent. However, the 2"d respondent refused to issue 2nd the relieving order to the petitioner' In the instant ease' respondent issued Memorandum Rc.No.365 / 1 1 / PR-V/ Maj or I RCK I 2022, dated O2'O l'2022 and a case in Cr.No.136 of 2O24 was registered in the year

2024. Though the departmental proceedings are pending against the petitioner from 2022 onwards, so far, there is no progress in the investigation. If the petitioner is not relieved from the 2"d respondent, he will lose the chance of new appointment in the 3'd respondent Institution' Further, as alleged by the petitioner's counsel, the I i petitioner has not suffered any conviction and he has not dismissed from service. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get relieving order from the 2.d respondent.

11. In view of the foregoing observations, the 2nd respondent is directed to issue the relieving order to the petitioner from the post of Police Constable (Civi! mentioning all the details with regard to pendency of the cases against the petitioner, forthwith.

12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. tl.o2.2025 Note: Issue C.C. today (B/o\ Prv NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J l