P.YELLAMANDA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking to call for the records relating to G.O.Rt No.260, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.I), Department, dtd. 2/12/2014 issued by the 1st respondent being in violation of the Fundamental Rules FR 54A(1) & (3) and also being contrary to order passed by this Court in W.P.No.36534 of 2011 dtd. 24/4/2013 and to quash the same. Consequently to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners by treating the suspension period from 7/7/2005 to 25/2/2007 and dismissal period from 11/8/2011 to 4/8/2013 as 'on duty' period with full pay and other allowances in accordance with FR 54-A(1)&(3).

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner while working as Dy.Executive Engineer at Suryapet, Nalgonda District, the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) laid a Trap on 7/7/2005 and caught hold of him for demanding and accepting bribe. Basing on which, the petitioner was placed under suspension, vide proceeding No.Vig.II(4)/42925/2005, dtd. 18/7/2005. Thereupon, respondent No.1 reviewed the petitioner's suspension order and reinstated into service, vide G.O.Rt.No.180, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.I), Department, dtd. 7/2/2007 and also referred the case to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceeding to enquire into allegations, vide Memo No.10777/Vig.I/2005-1, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.I), Department, dtd. 8/8/2007.

(3.) Sri B.Ashok, learned counsel for the petitioner contented that basing on the finding in the report of the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceeding, dtd. 28/7/2010, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.219, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.I), Department, dtd. 29/7/2011. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred OA No.6509 of 2011, before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (APAT), however the APAT has confirmed the order, dtd. 29/7/2011 passed by the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceeding (hereinafter referred as 'TDP'). Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed WP No.36534 of 2012 and this Court allowed the said writ petition, the operative portion of the order, dtd. 24/4/2013 reads as under: