IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 14629 of 2007 Between: 1 The State of A.P., rep. byits Secretary to Govt., Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (V.S.I), Dept., Secretariat, Hyd. 2 The Engineer -in-Chief, Panchayat Raj, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Sri V.V. Ramana, On Deputation, O/o. Dy. Executive Engineer, RWS, Bhimavaram, W.G.District. .....RESPONDENT 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 a Writ order or direction mor eparticuarlly one in thenatureof writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon'ble A.P.Admn., Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in O.A.no.2442/2004 dt. 21.09.2006 as being erroneous, illegal and unresonable and quash the same and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD W.P. NO.14629 of 2007 ORDER : ( Per HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED ) This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by the State challenging the order dated 21-9-2006 in O.A.No.2442 of 2004 passed by the Andhra Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, whereby the Tribunal allowed the O.A.No.2442 of 2004 ﬁled by the applicant, respondent herein, challenging the memo No.399/VS.I/A2/03-2 dated 10-2-2004 in rejecting the request of the applicant for treating the period of suspension from 21-6-1997 to 12-1-1998 as on duty. The applicant was placed under suspension consequent to the trap laid on 25-9-1997 penidng investigation into the trap case. The applicant preferred O.A.Nos.1996 and 3784 of 1998 seeking reinstatement into service. The said O.As., were disposed of by the Tribunal, directing to reinstate the applicant into service. Pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal, the applicant was reinstated into service. It is the further case of the applicant that the oﬀence registered under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, on the ﬁle of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for ACB Cases, ended in acquittal by judgment dated 11-2-2003. In view of the acquittal in the criminal case, the applicant approached the authorities for treating the period of suspension as on duty and the same was rejected, hence, preferred the instant O.A, and the Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the O.A. Hence, this Writ Petition by the State. As stated above, the Tribunal on earlier two occasions directed the authorities to reinstate the applicant into service, considering the factum of non- presence of the applicant at the time of trap, based on the strength of letter of the Engineer-in-Chief. Considering the earlier directions issued by the Tribunal to reinstate the applicant into service, and the fact that the applicant was acquitted of the charge by the competent criminal Court, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. holding that the suspension period was wholly unjustiﬁed. We therefore, see no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. No costs. ______ GM, J ______ GBP, J 15-9-2008 KK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 14629 of 2007 15-9-2008