IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18790 OF 2011 Date:18.07. 2011 Between:- M.Ramulu .. Petitioner And The Chief Engineer/O&M, KTPS, Paloncha, Khammam. .. Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18790 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the memo, dated 26.02.2011, issued by the respondent as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to set aside the same and declare the petitioner eligible for reinstatement with all consequential benefits. The petitioner has been working as JPA/O and M/KTPS since 1996 in the respondent organization. As he was childless, he adopted his brother-in-law’s daughter and got her married in the year 2003. As his son-in-law was harassing her daughter for additional dowry, his daughter filed Crime No.81 of 2010 in Palavancha Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 on 15.03.2010. As a counter blast to this crime, his son-in-law’s sister by name N. Ramadevi lodged a complaint in Paloncha Police station for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 294(b) and 506 I.P.C., which was numbered as Sessions Case No.63 of 2011 and the same is pending. As the petitioner was involved in a Sessions Case, the respondent issued the impugned memo. The offences alleged were done out of the course of employment. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that one N.Rama Devi, who is the sister of the son-in-law of the petitioner, lodged a complaint with Paloncha police against the petitioner basing on which, police registered a case under Sections 354, 294(b) and 506 I.P.C.; that the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 02.12.2010 and was released on bail on 08.12.2010; and that since the petitioner was confined in the judicial custody for more than 48 hours, the disciplinary authority placed him under suspension. The disciplinary authority has got a right to place an employee under suspension whenever an employee is detained in the custody for more than 48 hours. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the complaint has been withdrawn and there is no misconduct on the part of the petitioner. That aspect of the case has to be considered by the disciplinary authority. The factual matrix cannot be determined exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to make an application before the disciplinary authority and thereafter, the disciplinary authority shall take appropriate decision in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the service conditions of the petitioner. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 18th July, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18790 OF 2011 Date:18.07.2011 AMD