S.VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present Writ Petition is, to the Order dtd. 6/10/2004, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tribunal) in O.A.No.10502 of 2002 and the Memo No.32921Police.DA12000-4 dtd. 17/4/2002 issued by the 1st respondent State Government.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts and circumstances, leading to the filing of the present writ petition are as under The applicantpetitioner herein was initially appointed as Police Constable on 15/5/1977. On the ground that the petitioner herein along with certain others participated in Dharna at the APSP Battalion Headquarters, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against 28 Constables including the petitioner. The Commandant, 2nd Battalion, APSP Kurnool, Kurnool District-3rd respondent herein passed an Order vide proceedings P.R.21281, dtd. 14/6/1984, inflicting on the petitioner the punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner herein approached the composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh by filing a Writ Petition. The said Writ Petition came to be disposed of by the composite High Court, directing the petitioner herein to avail the alternative remedy by filing Departmental Appeal, with a further direction to reinstate the petitioner into service. In pursuance of the said order, the respondent authorities reinstated the applicantpetitioner herein into service on 31/10/1984. In pursuance of the aforesaid orders the petitioner herein preferred an appeal before the Director General and Inspector General of Police-2nd respondent herein, against the orders of punishment dtd. 14/6/1984 and the Director General and Inspector General of Police 2nd respondent herein vide proceedings R.C.No.520T285, dtd. 10/5/1985, rejected the said appeal filed by the petitioner. Subsequently, enclosing a copy of the order passed by the Tribunal in R.P.No.953 of 1987 and batch filed by the similarly situated Police Constables, petitioner herein submitted a representation to extend the same benefit in terms of the orders in the said R.P.No.953 of 1987 and batch. Subsequently, the State Government issued an order vide G.O.Rt.No.1268, Home (Police...D) Department, dtd. 16/5/1990, turning down the request of the petitioner herein, on the ground that the petitioner did not approach the Court and as his appeal was rejected by the 2nd respondent herein and as the petitioner admitted the charges and did not raise any valid grounds.

(3.) Assailing the validity of the said orders of the State Government, petitioner herein approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.SR.No.4358 of 1992 with M.A.No.1266 of 1992, for condonation of delay. The said Original Application was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground of delay, but made the following observations We however wish to point out that Government should reconsider the matter. The ground that he had not approached the Tribunal and therefore Government do not see any reason to interfere in the matter cannot be said to be a just ground. The Government are therefore advised to reconsider the matter on its merits having regard to the fact that persons similarly placed as the applicant were treated leniently under the directions of the Tribunal, if they consider reappointing the applicant on such terms including lesser punishment as it deems appropriate and also like not treating the period of absence from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement as duty for the purposes of salary and allowances etc. It is hoped that Government will bestow their best attention and dispose of the matter finally, preferably within three (03) months from the date of receipt of this order.