Disposed¶55

M.Nageswara Rao v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Sept 2025WP/35151/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; Justice Surepalli Nanda; W.P. No. 35151 of 2022; writ petition closed as infructuous after acquittal; parallel disciplinary proceedings and criminal proceedings against police constable; deferment of departmental enquiry during criminal case; Memorandum PR No. B-2101/Major/Cyb/2022 dated 06.06.2022; Commissioner of Police Cyberabad; interim stay 08.09.2022 extended 23.09.2022; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; Article 226 Constitution of India; Section 151 CPC; no substantive ruling on parallel proceedings issue.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed (cause does not survive following acquittal in the criminal proceedings) without adjudication on merits; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition ordered to stand closed. ¶55

M.Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶55

Issue for consideration

Whether the disciplinary proceedings proposed against the petitioner by Memorandum PR No. B-2101/Major/Cyb/2022 dated 06.06.2022 of the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, conducted parallel to the pending criminal proceedings, are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and whether the disciplinary proceedings should be deferred till conclusion of the criminal proceedings.

¶16

Court's answer

Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner had been concluded in acquittal, the Court held that the cause in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication, and therefore closed the writ petition with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in the writ petition were also ordered to stand closed. The legality of conducting disciplinary proceedings parallel to criminal proceedings was not adjudicated.

¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Surepalli Nanda J., order dated 10.09.2025), Writ Petition No. 35151 of 2022: A police constable challenged, under Article 226, the Memorandum vide PR No. B-2101/Major/Cyb/2022 dated 06.06.2022 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, which proposed disciplinary proceedings against him parallel to pending criminal proceedings, and sought deferment of the disciplinary proceedings till conclusion of the criminal proceedings. On 08.09.2022 the Court had granted interim stay (for two weeks) of the proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 29.07.2022, later extended on 23.09.2022. At the final hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the criminal proceedings had concluded in acquittal. Recording that submission, the Court found the cause in the writ petition no longer survived for adjudication, closed the writ petition with no order as to costs, and ordered pending miscellaneous petitions to stand closed. The question of the legality of parallel disciplinary and criminal proceedings was left unadjudicated.

¶1

132s21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE^{TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶7

WRIT P ETITION^{NO:35151 OF 2022}

¶8

Between:

¶9

l.I Naoeswara Rao, S/o/^{IVl.Seetharamulu,Agedabout30- years'Police} i.;;irbl;.1risi, ne.ioent^{of Amangal,Presentlv workingat f'4adhapurpolice} station, Cyberabd,^{Hyderabad-500065.}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

'l . The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal^{Secretary' Home} Deoartment. Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶13

2 ih6tilmts-ioner^{of Polici:, Cvberabad Citv, HvderabadCitv}

¶14

s. r6e Aooitional^{commissioner of police,cAR Head Quarters,CyDeraba6.}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under^{Article226 of the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances^{statedin the affidavit filed therewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a writ of^{Mandamus or any otherappropriatewrit' orderor} lt/emorandum^{vide PR} No. B-2l0^{1 /tr/ajor I Cybl2o22, daled} d irection, declaring of police, CYberabad,^{the 2nd} 06.06.2022, issued by the Commissioner respondentherein,proposingtoconductDisciplinaryProceedingsagainstthe petitionerherein,paralleltopendingcriminalproceedingsasillegal'arbitrary' WithoUtjurisdictionandcontrarytotheSettledLawandfurtherdirectthe respondentsherein,todefertheDisciplinaryProceedingsagainstthepetitioners herein, till the^{conclusionof the Criminal Proceedingsagainst the petitioners} herein,^{pending till conclusionof the Criminal Proceeding}

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fileJ in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein, to defer the Disciplinary proceedings against the petitioners herein, tilr the concrusion of the criminat proceedings, by suspending the I\4emorandum vide^pR No. B-2l01/Majoricybr2o22, dated 06.06.2022, issued by the commissioner of porice, cyberabad, the 2nd respondent herein, pending disposal of the abc,ve writ petition

¶19

lA NO:^.l OF 2025

¶20

Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit firecr in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to extend the interirr orders dt. oB.o9.zo22 passed in w. p No.35151 of 2o22 pendtng disposal of the main case in the interest of justice IANO: 2OF2 022

¶21

Between:

¶22

The State cf Telangana, represented by its principal Secretary, Home ^^{Department.rjecretariat. Hydeiabad.} 2. The Commissioner of polici-,, Cyberabad City, Hyderabad Citv.

¶23

The Add itio na r com m issioner oi porice, cn('H.lJciiJ,i"iJ,tybe ra oao

¶24

...PET|T|ONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶25

AND

¶26

l\rl.Nageswara Rao. S/o/ .^{M.Seetharamulu,Aged about 30 years,police} co nstabre l 2''z5'1, Resident of Aman gar, preientiy woir<-ing'uir,.,l.lilp"r,. pJii"" station. Cyberabd. Hyderabad_500063.

¶27

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶28

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 preased to Vacate the interim orders dated 08/09/2 022 and extended on 23rogr2o22 in l.A.No. 1 ot 2O22 in W.p.No 35151 of 2022

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ANAND NAIDU MAfvItDI

¶30

Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR SERVICES (HOME)

¶31

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶32

.i.,: {" "f

¶33

¶34

THE HON,BLE^{MRS. JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶35

WRIT PE TI N No.3 15 OF 2022

¶36

oRDER:

¶37

Heard Sri^{AnandNaidu Mamidi, learnedcounsel} the Petitioner^{and the learned} appearing^{on behalf of} Assistant^{GovernmentPleader forservices(Home)} appearing^{on behalf of the respondents'}

¶38

2 The titi ner^a ro hed th Co rt eek n ra f

¶39

as und^er:

¶40

to issue a^{writ of Mandamus orany other} appropriate^{writ, order or direction, declaring Memorandum} vide PR No.B-2l01 lV,alor/Cybl2O22,^{dated 06'06'2022'} issued by the Commissioner^{of police, Cyberabad'the 2.i} respondent^{herein, proposing toconductDisciplinary} Proceedings^{againstthe petitionerherein'parallelto} pending criminal^{proceedings as illegal' arbitrary' without} jurisdiction and^{contrary to the settled Law and further} directtherespondentsherein,todefertheDisciplinary Proceedings^{against thepetitionersherein' tillthe} conclusion of^{theCriminal Proceedings against the} petitioners herein,^{pendingtill conclusionof the Criminal} Proceeding^and Pass..."

E--B

w.p.no.3srsr of 2l#i

PE RUS ED THE ECO RD:-

¶45

Tha sC o rt,v] de its order dated 08.O 9.20 22, oassed !nter rm orders tn favour of th EDetiti ner a nd he samels extractedhe reu n der:

¶46

"Notice before admission.

¶47

Learned Governr ror the respondents seeks rwo -l:t,,;:;:::J;::::::.

¶48

Learned counser for the petitioner submits that in the same set of facts, a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner, but charge sheet is yet to be tired.

¶49

It is su bm itted that on the same set ot facts, disciplinary proceedings have bcen initiated agarnst the pelitioner by issuing a charge memo and the petitioner submiLted expla nation seeking suspensio n of procee dings till the conclusion of the criminal proceed ings. Howe ver, the respondents have appointed an enquiry officer and directed him to (:omptete the enquiry within a period of two(2) months and submit his findings It is submi tted that if the discipltnary proceedings allowed to go on. the petitio n er may have to civulge hjs defence which would prejudice his case in the C-iminal Court. Therefore, he seek s stay of the enquiry proceedrngs.

¶50

in view of the above, this court is inclined to grant interim stay of the proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 79-07-2022 for a period of two weeks. post on 22_Og.2022..

¶51

sN.J W.P.No.35151 of 2022

¶52

, i I I I :

¶53

DISCUS ION AND CONCLUSION:-

¶54

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner brings to the notice of this Court that the criminal proceedings initiated against the^{petitionerhad} been concluded in acquittal, and hence, no further orders are necessary in the^present writ^petition.

¶55

Bringing the said submission of the learned^counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitioner on record, the^writ petition is closed since cause in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication anymore. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶56

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^pendlng in this^Writ

¶57

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶58

SD/-M.NAGAMANI S ISTANT REGISTRAR

¶59

//TRUE COPY//

¶60

SECTION OFFICER

¶61

To,