A watchman suspended after news reports sought treatment of his suspension period as on duty following his acquittal in a criminal case and dropping of disciplinary proceedings, including arrears of pay and pension. The court, without going into merits, permitted a fresh representation and directed respondents to decide within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3301 I
HIGH COURTFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTHDAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTYFIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEPULLA KARTHIK
WRIT PETITIONNO: '11875OF 2021
Between:
Daniel, S/o. Devaram,Aged about 52 years,OccWatchman, O/o' S W'G'H Hostel, KamareddY District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article226 of lhe constitution of lndia prayingthat in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed therewith,the High court maybe pleased to issue a writ, order or directionmoreparticularly one in the natureof writ of MANDAMUS todeclare the actionof the respondent in not considering the claim of thepetitionerfor treating the suspension period from 16.06'1999 to 13.06.2002"as on duty"in view of acquittal in criminal case No.155/1999 dated ls.oT.2oo2bytheHon,bleJudicialFirstClassMagistrate,Banswadaand dropping of disciplinaryproceedings is illegal arbitrary andunco nstitutional and consequently directthe respondents to treat the suspension period"as on duty" from 16.06.1999 to'13.06.2002in view of acquittalin criminal case No.155/'1999 dated 18.07.2002by the Hon'ble Judicial First class Magistrate, Banswada and
dropping of disciplinary proceedings with all consequential benefits which includes arrears of pay and pension.
IANO:1OF 2021
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pteased to 11e-"t ,n",respondents to treat the. suspension period ,,as on duty,, from 1 6 06 1999 to 1 3.06.2002 in view of acquittar in criminar case No.1 55i.r 999 dated 18 07 2002 by the Hon'bre Judiciar First crass Magistrate, Banswada and dropping of disciplinary proceedings forthwith by disposing of his appeal/representation dated 25.10.2017 in the interest of justice.
Counsel for the petitioner: SRI AJAy KUMAR NERELLA
Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES_II
The Gourt made the following: ORDER.
-lw
,>:,,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA XARTHIK
IIIRIT PETITION No.11875 OF 2021
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is fileil under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"...1o issue a uit, order or direction more panticularlg one in the nature of Wit of MANDAMUS to declare the action of the respond.ent in not consideing the ctqtm of the petitioner for treating the suspension peiod from 16.06.1999 to 13.06.2O02 "as on dutg" in uieu of acquittal in Criminal Case No.155/1999 dated 18.07.2002 bg the Hon'ble Judicictl First Class Magistrctte, Bansluado and d.ropping of disciplinary proceedings is illegat, arbitrary and uncorustitutional and consequentlg direct the respondents to treat the suspension peiod ai on duty from 16.06.1999 to 13.O6.2OO2 in uiew of acquittal in Ciminal Case No.155/1999 dated 18.O7.2OO2 bg the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrqte, Bansluada and dropping of disciplinary proceedtngs with all consequential benefits which includes arears of pag and pension and to pass . . . "
wn I1875 2021
2
judgment, dated 18.07.2O02. Therefore, the petitroner has made a representation before the respondents on 2S.7O.2OlT requesting for treating thc suspension period i.e., from 19.O6. i999 to 13.06.2002 as on duty. However, no action has been taken by the respondents so far. Hence, learned counsel prays this Court to permit the petitioner to make fresh representation ttefore the respondents redressing his grievance and the respondents may be directed to consider the same and pass appropnate o.d..s, *ithin a stipulated lteriod of time.
.\
\
3
,1'-
wp r r8?s IJri
appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks therefrom and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
SD/.P.PADMANABHA REDDY AS T REGISTRAR
/ITRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
BSR
BS
g
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1110212025
ORDER
'- sr4; €
,<
v
o 2 0 FrB 2025 n
,/
WP.No.11875 ot 2021
DISPOSING OF THE WRITPETITION,
WITHOUT COSTS
a OF ao 'lr{
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's suspension period from 16.06.1999 to 13.06.2002 should be treated as duty following acquittal in Criminal Case No.155/1999 and dropping of disciplinary proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Daniel
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, SC Welfare Department
The Commissioner of SC Welfare Department, State of Telangana, Hyderabad
The District Collector, Nizambad District
The Deputy Director, SC Welfare Department, Nizambad District
The District SC Welfare Officer, Nizambad District
Pulla Karthik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
