THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO:30830 of 2011 DATE:22.11.2011 BETWEEN G.ASHOK …PETITIONER AND THE APSRTC REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR & OTHERS …RESPONDENTS. THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO:30830 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for writ of mandamus to declare the impugned proceedings No:E1/101 (01)/1996-BNS, dated 9.5.1997 in removing him from service as illegal, unjust, contrary to law and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently, to set aside the same and direct the respondents to consider his representations dated 1.8.2008 and 19.7.2011 by taking into consideration of the judgment of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Adilabad District in C.C.No:136 of 2001, dated 8.4.2008 and in the light of the orders of this Court in other writ petitions and reinstate him into service with continuity of service and attendant benefits. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Conductor through regularly constituted Selection Committee in the year 1990 and his services were regularized in the year 1994. While so, the third respondent issued a charge sheet dated 27.11.1996 on the ground that he produced a false S.S.C certificate. He submitted his explanation and having not satisfied with the explanation, enquiry was conducted and the enquiry officer conducted the enquiry without following the prescribed procedure and therefore, the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse and biased. However, basing on such a report, he was removed from service by order dated 9.5.1997. It is his further case that while so, the police authorities also filed a case in C.,C.No:136 of 2001 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Adilabad District and after thorough enquiry and trial, he was acquitted on 8.4.2008. In case of similarly situated persons who filed W.P.No:3368 of 1997, W.P.No:1296 of 2002 and W.P.No:35126 of 1998, this Court directed the respondents to consider and reinstate them into service if the employee is acquitted in the criminal case. Therefore, he submitted representations dated 1.8.2008 and 19.7.2011 to the authorities seeking to consider his case for reinstatement by taking into consideration of the acquittal of the criminal case. But, the said representations have not been considered so far. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the criminal case filed against the petitioner has been acquitted and in view of the orders of this Court in W.P.No:1296 of 2002, W.P.No:3368 of 1997 and W.P.No:35126 of 1998, the petitioner is entitled tobe reinstated. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representations dated 1.8.2008 and 19.7.2011 seeking reinstatement. But, the respondents have not taken any action in that regard. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned standing counsel for the Corporation that though the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case filed by the police, but the same is not a clean acquittal on the ground that the acquittal against the petitioner was recorded only due to benefit of doubt and therefore, the case of the petitioner cannot be considered. Now, coming to the facts on hand, the facts that remain undisputed are that after conducting an enquiry, the petitioner was removed from service and on the other hand, the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case in connection with production of fake S.S.C certificate, filed by the police and the representations filed by the petitioner on 1.8.2008 and 19.7.2011 are pending consideration before the authorities. In the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case filed by the police and irrespective of the fact as to whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement into service or not, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I feel it just and proper to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner, dated 1.8.2008 and 19.7.2011 stated to have been filed by him, in accordance with law within a period of four (4) Weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice G.Chandraiah Date:22.11.2011 Note: CC in one Week. (BO) gurc. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO:30830 of 2011 DATE:22.11.2011