IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 437 of 2006 Between: M. Nageshwara rao S/o. Sri Mayyappah, Visakhapatnam, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 AP Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, 2 The Chief General Manager, HRD and Appellate Authority, APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam, 3 Superintendent Engineer, APEPDCL, Operation Circle, Visakhapatnam, .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction or a writ more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS restraining the respondents from giving effect to the order of dismissal dt. 28-11- 2003 and the consequential appellate order dt. 7-4-2004 be set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.RAVINDRANATH Counsel for the Respondents: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Sub-Engineer in the erstwhile A.P. Electricity Board, in the year 1991. On 05.10.1994, a trap was laid against the petitioner and he was caught red-handed. C.C.No.93 of 1995 on the file of the Special Court for ACB cases at Visakhapatnam, was registered against him. Through its judgment, dated 28.12.1998, the trial Court acquitted the petitioner. Thereupon, the State preferred Criminal Appeal No.1139 of 1999 before this Court. The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded to the trial Court, for fresh disposal. C.C.No.93 of 1995 was renumbered as C.C.No.55 of 2000. Through its judgment, dated 11.11.2003, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo imprisonment for six months. In view of this development, the third respondent passed an order, dated 28.11.2003, dismissing the petitioner from service. The petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.1185 of 2003 before this Court and obtained an order of bail. Simultaneously, he filed departmental appeal before the first respondent. The appeal was rejected on 07.04.2004. This Writ Petition is filed with a prayer to restrain the respondents from giving effect to the order, dated 28.11.2003, and the consequential appellate order, dated 07.04.2004. Heard Sri S.Ravindranath, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. The prayer of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is somewhat peculiar. The order of dismissal, dated 28.11.2003, as such, is not challenged. It is only prayed that the said order be not enforced against the petitioner. As long as the order of dismissal stands, the question of not enforcing the same does not arise. Unless and until the petitioner gets any relief in Criminal Appeal No.1185 of 2003, he cannot be reinstated into service. It is not as if the petitioner was dismissed on the basis of any independent departmental enquiry. When it is exclusively based upon the conviction meted out to the petitioner by the criminal court, it cannot be modified, or varied as long as the conviction stands. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed. It is, however, observed that, in case the Criminal Appeal No.1185 of 2003, preferred by the petitioner, is allowed, the respondents would be under obligation to review the matter and pass fresh orders, in conformity with the judgment that may be rendered by this Court. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt:18.06.2006 GJ