IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 27788 of 2008 Between: P. Nagi Reddy S/o. Radha Reddy Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, rep. by its Executive Officer, Tirupati, Chittoor 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 more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not considering the petitioner case for promotion as fitter as per seniority list, in spite of his representation dt. 06.11.2008 as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and offends articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to consider the petitioner case for promotion to the post of fitter as per seniority list. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent: Y.V.RAVI PRASAD(SPL.SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner joined in Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams as Helper in the year 1991 and thereafter, he has been promoted as Assistant Fitter. His grievance is that his case has not been considered for the post of Fitter because of pendency of criminal case being C.C.No.489 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati, against him. For better appreciation of the grievance of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to refer para 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, which reads as under; “ I submit that the respondent is not considering my case for promotion as Fitter, as per seniority list on par with my juniors. Having learnt about such non-consideration, I submitted representation dated 06.11.2008 requesting the respondent to consider my case for being promoted as Fitter as per seniority list. The respondent received the same, but did not place me in the zone of consideration. I personally met the respondent and requested to consider my case also for promotion. The respondent orally stated that a criminal case was pending against me and until finalization thereof, it would not consider my case for promotion. In fact such criminal case is a false implication against me by the first accused in C.C.NO.489 of 2007 pending on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tirupati. I submit that was a case were one M. Rajendra being first accused was caught red-handed, while he was smuggling red sandal wood. On his alleged confession, I was implicated as third accused in the case. Confession against co-accused is not admissible in evidence. That case is a false case registered against me for the offences under Section 29(4)(a)(i) of Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 and under Section 379 IPC. It would take long way for disposal of that case. I should not be discriminated and denied promotion on that ground. I am neither convicted nor sentenced in that case. I should not be discriminated from my juniors and denied promotion. I am entitled for being considered for promotion as per seniority list. Mere pendency of criminal case is not a bar for consideration of my case for promotion. There is no legal bar to promote an employee during the pendency of criminal case. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Standing Counsel of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams takes notice on behalf of the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pendency of criminal case cannot be a ground to ignore the claim of the petitioner for further promotion. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, on instructions, submits that departmental proceeding is pending against the petitioner and as soon as the departmental proceeding is concluded and the criminal case is disposed of, the petitioner will be given all benefits, if he is otherwise eligible. He placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No.529, General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 19.08.2008, wherein it has been instructed the department to consider the cases of employees for promotion to the next higher categories wherever the charges are held not proved by the criminal Court and acquitted them, even though an appeal is preferred before the higher Court against such acquittal. In view of the pendency of the departmental proceeding and the criminal case against the petitioner, the respondent is justified in ignoring his claim for promotion to the post of Fitter for the present. As and when the departmental proceeding is concluded and in the criminal case he is acquitted, the respondent is directed to review the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Fitter. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date:17.02.2009 sj