Disposed

Sri C. Pramod Kumar, v. The Managing Director, a.P.Beverages Corporation Limited

Telangana HC19 Apr 2017WP/13986/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, dismissed from service with allegation of misappropriation, was acquitted in criminal proceedings. The court discharged its hand directing the respondent authority to examine the petitioner's representation dated 24.10.2016 for reinstatement and issue a reasoned order within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Instructed the 1st respondent to examine the petitioner's representation dated 24.10.2016 and decide on reinstatement within six weeks.

Sri C. Pramod Kumar, Vs The Managing… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

W.P.NO.13986 OF 2017

¶3

O R D E R

¶4

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G.Ravi Mohan learned Standing counsel for respondents 1 and 3 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the 2^nd respondent.

¶5

Petitioner was working as Store Operator in the A. P. Beverages Corporation Limited. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on the allegation of misappropriation of funds of the Corporation, which resulted in imposing of punishment of dismissal from service by proceedings dated 5.7.2008. This order of dismissal has become final. According to the petitioner, he was prosecuted under criminal law. He was accused in C.C.No.294 of 2007 on the file of VII Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at Hayathnagar. The Metropolitan Magistrate, by judgment dated 3.12.2013 acquitted the petitioner for the charges levelled against him.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the very same allegations, disciplinary proceedings as well as criminal prosecution were launched against the petitioner and as the petitioner is now acquitted in the criminal proceedings, he is entitled for the benefit of reinstatement into service. Ventilating his grievance and requesting to reinstate him into service, petitioner made a representation dated 24.10.2016, to the 1^st respondent – Managing Director. Alleging inaction on his representation, this writ petition is filed.

¶7

The request of the petitioner to reinstate him into service consequent on his acquittal by a competent criminal court, requires consideration by the competent authority. Since the petitioner has already submitted representation and the same is yet to be acted upon, without expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to examine the claim of the petitioner as ventilated in his representation dated 24.10.2016 and take decision and communicate the same by a reasoned order to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶8

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶10

---------------------------------------- P.NAVEEN RAO,J

¶11

DATE:19—04—2017 AVS

Sri C. Pramod Kumar, v. The Managing Director, a.P.Beverages Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri C. Pramod Kumar, v. The Managing Director, a.P.Beverages Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Talari Chennamma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

N. Rajagopal Naidu Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Golla Laxmi Devi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal

Mohd. Moinuddin, Vs Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural

Apsrtc Sc/St Employees Welfare Association, Vs The A.P.S.R.T.C.

Sirimalla Sridhar S/o. Thukaram, R/o. Flat No.112 Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary