IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4241 of 2008 Between: P. Kista Reddy , S/o. Ranga Reddy, R/o.Janga pally Village, Mirdoddi Mandal,Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Educational Officer, Medak at Sangareddy, 2 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Medak at Sangareddy, 3 The Mandal Educational Officer, Doulatabad Mandal, Mandal Parishad, Medak District. 4 The Secretary to Govt., Educational Department, Govt., of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 The Director of School Education, A.P., Hyderabad. 6 The Audit Officer, Local Fund, Medak at Sangareddy, 7 The Accountant General, A.P., Hyderabad. .....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 call for the records concerning O.A.No.8341/2003 dated 21.09.2007 of the Hon'ble Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad and quash the same by issuing an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, more specially one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari as being opposed to the established principles of law regarding the punishment in Criminal prosecution and also contrary to the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, so as to treat the period of suspension from 10.11.1973 to 12.03.1981 as on duty with all consequential benefits such as increments, service benefits and incidental other benefits including enhancement in pension for payment. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.LAKSHMANA CHARY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Smt. G. ELISHA (STANDING COUNSEL FOR ZPPS) Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 3 to 5:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondents No.6 & 7: SRI A. RAJASEKHAR REDDY (ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL) The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No:4241 OF 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- applicant seeking to call for the records concerning O.A.No.8341/2003 dated 21.09.2007 of the Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad and quash the same and to direct the respondents to treat the period of suspension from 10.11.1973 to 12.03.1981 as on duty with all consequential benefits such as increments, service benefits and incidental other benefits including enhancement in pension for payment. The petitioner, who is the applicant in the above O.A., filed the O.A., seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not disposing the representation filed by the applicant and not settling the suspension period as on duty as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the respondents to treat the suspension period as on duty and pay the salary to the suspension period and other benefits by disposing the representation filed by the applicant, on the ground that he was prosecuted for the offence under Section 325 IPC and he was released under probation of good conduct and thereafter, he was reinstated into service. He made a representation to the respondents seeking settlement of the period of suspension while he was facing prosecution by treating the said period as on duty. But so far no action was taken. The Tribunal having observed that consequent on the conviction and release under P.O. Act, it appears that the observations made in the judgment of the criminal Court with regard to the finding of the guilt not having any effect on the service of the applicant, cannot be considered as a bar for the appointing authority to pass orders with regard to the treatment of period of suspension and in the instant case, the facts show that the suspension was justified and there is no reason for the applicant to claim that he is entitled to have the period treated as on duty on the ground that suspension was unjustified and therefore, the applicant would not be entitled to any relief, rejected the claim of the applicant. But however, the tribunal directed the respondents to refix the pay of the applicant in accordance with the rules and in terms of the revised pay scales issued from time to time within a period of three months from the date of the order. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been preferred. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. The undisputed fact is that on release under the Probation of Offenders Act, the petitioner was reinstated into service. On a perusal of the order impugned, the applicant made representations seeking to fix his pay in the revised pay scales and to treat the period of suspension as on duty. Insofar as fixation of pay is concerned, the tribunal issued a direction to the respondents to refix the pay of the applicant in accordance with the rules in terms of the Revised Pay Scales issued from time to time. Insofar as the relief as to the treatment of suspension period is concerned, the tribunal rejected the claim of the petitioner- applicant. A perusal of the material available on record goes to show that the applicant was released under the P.O. Act. Simply because the petitioner was released under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, it cannot be said that it amounts to an acquittal and thereby, he is entitled to the benefits as that of an acquittal. In the present facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the petitioner has been released under the provisions of the Probation of the Offenders Act, We feel that the approach of the tribunal in passing the order impugned, is justified and as such, the order impugned, does not warrant any interference by this Court. We see no merits in this writ petition and the same is accordingly liable to be dismissed. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ____________________ Justice G. Chandraiah Date: 4th March, 2008 Nn/Gurc. HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No:4241 OF 2008 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 04.03.2008