Disposed¶34

Jinugu Nagaraju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Mar 2025WP/5301/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: suspension without departmental enquiry; reinstatement representation; mandamus to decide representation; time-bound direction (4 weeks); Line Inspector TGNPDCL; ACB FIR under Section 7(a) Prevention of Corruption Act; APSEB Discipline and Appeal Regulations; Article 226 Telangana High Court; writ disposed without costs; no merits decided. Bench: single judge (Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao), decided 03.03.2025. No precedents cited; no dissent.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four (04) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications, if any, closed as a sequel. ¶34

Jinugu Nagaraju Vs The State of Telangana — Corruption | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondent No.3 in not taking any action on the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2025 and not reinstating the petitioner into service is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, warranting a writ of mandamus. +1 more

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Without going into the merits, the respondent authorities were directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶33

Key takeaways

The consideration of the representation and passing of appropriate orders was to be completed within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶33
The direction was issued without going into the merits of the case; consequently, no finding was rendered on the legality of the suspension or the underlying allegations.obiter¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition under Article 226 filed by a serving Line Inspector of TGNPDCL (Palwancha, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District) who was placed under suspension on 28.10.2024 following a complaint by one G.Nagaraj alleging acceptance/demand of illegal gratification of Rs.26,000/- based on a recorded conversation dated 27.10.2024, and registration of FIR No.09/RCT-ACB-KMM/2024 under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; no departmental enquiry initiated. His representation dated 07.01.2025 to Respondent No.3 (Divisional Engineer) seeking reinstatement went un-actioned. HELD, disposing of the petition without going into merits: respondent authorities directed to consider the representation dated 07.01.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four (04) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs; miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

[³³⁰⁴ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

IVIONDAY, THE THIRD DAY oF IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITIONNO :5301 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

/;lyOg^{t\aggraju,S/o.Lakshmaiah,Agedabout42 years,} Occ. Line lnspector, R/o H No.5-14. S.c.cotony. parwancha, D"antherabora. (himmam rerangani- siizi ii.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 l!9 ltatg^{ot Telangana,.Rep.by its principat Secretary Department of} Energy. Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.'

¶12

2 T,e^langanaState Northern^power Distribution Company Limited, Rep. by its. Managing Director Vidhyuth Soudha, Khairtabad HyAeianaO

¶13

3 The Divisional Enoineer Northern power Distribution company of rerangana Ltd.. Kothagudeml Bhadradri-Kot'rgra;, D[iri;i^{"" ."}

¶14

....,RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition Under Articre 226 of rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any order or direction, writ or writs, more particurarry one in the nature of wRlr oF IvTANDAMUS decraring the action of the Respondent No.3 in not taking any action on the representation on 07 t01l2o2s, and not re-instate Petitioner into service is as illegal, arbitrary, and violation of principals of natural justice qnd consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to consider the representation dated 0710112025 and re-instate petitioner in the interest of justrce and equity.

¶16

I.A.NO:1 OF 2O25

¶17

Petitron Under sectron i 5 r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated.in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court.may be preased to

¶18

'':

¶19

direct the 3rd Respcndent^{to re-instate the petitionerinto servicein pursuance of} the representalion on^{071o112025is pending disposal of the above writ petition in} the interest of^{justicerand equity.}

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner^{: SRI CH.JANARDHANREDDY}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1: GP FOR ENERGY}

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.2& 3 : SRIP.V.S.PRASAD}

¶23

The Court made the following^ORDER

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHUIAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.53 O1 of 2O2S

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard learned counsel appearing for_ the petitioners, learned Government pleader for Energr appearing for respondent No.1 ald Mr.p.V.S prasad, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and perused the record

¶27

l,earned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as a Line Inspector in the office of the Assistant trngineering Operations, TGNPDCL, Town_I, Palwancha, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District. ln the month of September, 2024 on a complaint made by one G.Nagaraj, son of Kishan, resident of Karal<a Vitlage of palwalch Maldal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District, alleging that the petitioner had accepted illegal gratification to a tune of Rs.26,OOO /_ arrd demanded to pay Rs.26,OOO/- ald the conversation that was taken place between the petitioner and the said G.Nagaraju on 27.1O.2O24, was recorded and the petitioner was piaced under srrspension on 28.1O.2024, vide memo No.DEE/Opn.lKGM/ JAO/Adm./U1lD.No.25i4 /2%1, by exercising the powers

..:.1

conferred^{under regulation1 i (a) (ii) and1 I (b) o{APSEB} discipline anit^{appeal regulations' But, till today'n<' enquiry} has been initiated^{against the petitionerexcept lodging the} criminal cas,:^{r'ide FIR No 09/RCT-ACB-KMMl202'4 ttnder} Section^{7(a) o1' Preventionof CorruptionAct' 1988 (as amended} in 2018).

¶32

LearneC. counsel^{for the petitioner further submits that} the petitioncr^{made arepresentationon07 'O1, '2025to} respondent^{I\1o.3 u'ith a requestto re-instate him into service'} but till date. no^{action has been takenby respondent No'3'} Therefore,^{the petitionerhled the presentwrit petition'}

¶33

Having considered^{the submissions made llylearned} counsel for^{the: Petitionerand withoutgoing into merits of the} case, the respondent^{authorities are directed to cor-rsider the} representation^{of the petitioner, dated 07'01'2025 and pass} appropriate^{ordersin accord.ancewith law, rvithin a period of} four (04)^{weeksfrom the date of receipt of a copy of this order'}

¶34

With tl-re above direction,^{the Writ Petitionis disposed of'} No order as to^costs

¶35

¶36

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in

¶37

this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶38

SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

s CTION OFFICER

1 The Principal Secretary, Department of Energy, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶43

2 The Managing Director, Telangana State Northern power Distribution Company Limited, Vidhyuth Soudha, Khairtabad Hyderabad. The Divisional Engineer, Northern power Distribution Company of Telangana Ltd., Kothagudem, Bhadradri-Kothagudem Diskict.

¶44