HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR W.P. No. 2402 of 2010 DATED: 26.07.2011 Between: The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corpn. .. Petitioner And 1. Smt. K.Ramulamma 2. The Registrar, APAT .. Respondents O R D E R:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) The assertion of the petitioner – Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, is that while the 1st respondent was working as Kamatan in the petitioner-Corporation, Crime No. 373 of 2000 was registered against her for the offences punishable under Sections 498- A and 304(B) IPC, based on which, she was suspended from service. While so, the learned IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in S.C. No. 177 of 2003 convicted her of charged offences and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 7 years. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, she preferred Crl.A.No.950 of 2004 along with an application seeking suspension of sentence, and this Court, vide order dated 07.04.2004 in Crl.M.P.No.348 of 2004, suspended the sentence of imprisonment. The petitioner-Corporation, based on the conviction imposed by the trial Court on the 1st respondent, dismissed her from services vide Proceedings dated 17.09.2004. Challenging the same, the 1st respondent filed O.A. No. 5913 of 2007, and the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, vide order dated 29.06.2009, while allowing the O.A., set aside the order of dismissal from service and ordered reinstatement of the 1st respondent into service forthwith. Assailing the order of the Tribunal, the petitioner-Corporation has filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent has submitted that this Court, by judgment dated 08.12.2010 delivered in Crl. A.No. 950 of 2004, while allowing the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and the Tribunal also ordered reinstatement of the 1st respondent into service, as such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent that the lower appellate Court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the 1st respondent and the fact that the same has not been controverted by the petitioner-Corporation, we are of the opinion that she is entitled to be reinstated into service forthwith. Hence, The petitioner – Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, is directed to consider the case of the 1st respondent and reinstate her into service in the petitioner-Corporation forthwith, in case no other charges are pending against her, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No order as to costs. Subjection to the above direction, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J 26.07.2011 _______________ K.G. SHANKAR, J Note: Furnish copy in a week B/o bcj