B Uma Rani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the Proceedings dated 12.10.2020 vide C.No.1954/A-1/2020 rejecting the claim of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Women Head Constable with effect from 2015 as illegal and arbitrary.

¶26

The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:

¶27

The Petitioner was appointed as Constable in the year 1991. While so, a Charge Memorandum was issued under Rule 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1991, stating that the Petitioner had left the head quarters without permission of superior officers during medical leave for about 64 days and did not respond to the Notice from 09.01.2012, apart from absenting from duty without any intimation from 21.01.2012 to 30.01.2012.

¶28

Consequent to the enquiry conducted thereon, the Petitioner was imposed a punishment of postponement of increment for a period of two years without effect on future increments and pension vide Proceedings dated 28.03.2012 and treating the Medical Leave period from 23.10.2012 to

¶29

3

¶30

30.03.2013 as leave without pay.

¶31

Questioning the same, the Petitioner filed O.A. No. 6652 of 2015 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal vide Order dated 30.10.2018 partly allowed the O.A., setting aside the punishment in so far as treating the Medical Leave period from 23.10.2012 to 30.03.2013 as leave without pay but confirmed the order in so far as the punishment of postponement of increment for a period of 2 years without effect on future increments and pension. During the pendency of the said O.A., the Petitioner was promoted as Head Constable on 04.07.2017.

¶32

The grievance of the Petitioner now is that the Petitioner should be promoted retrospectively from 2015, i.e., the year the minor punishment of postponement of two increments had ended. The claim of the Petitioner to that effect was rejected under the impugned order. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶33

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as the order of punishment ended in the year 2015, the Petitioner should have been notionally promoted from 2015 and not from the date of actual promotion, i.e., on 04.07.2017. He further submits that the impugned Order cannot be sustained, as this particular aspect was not considered by the respondent

¶34

4

¶35

authorities.

¶36

Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions

¶37

submits that the Petitioner had filed an appeal before the Respondent No.2 and the same would be considered in accordance with law.

¶38

The minor penalty of stoppage of two increments was imposed against the Petitioner vide Proceedings dated 04.07.2013, and the same had ended by the year 2015. The bar of consideration of the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Head Constable was only during the currency of punishment, i.e., up to 04.07.2015 and the Petitioner would have to be considered for promotion from that date. As the Petitioner had filed an appeal before the Respondent No.2, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶39

i) The Respondent No. 2 shall examine the appeal/representation of the Petitioner dated 05.03.2021, taking note of the fact that the currency of punishment of the Petitioner had ended in the year 2015, and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of three months from today.

¶40

ii) there shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

5

¶42

As a sequel, the miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶43

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

¶44

Date:07.10.2025

¶45

eha