This writ petition has been instituted seeking a declaration that the dismissal from service of the writ petitioner ordered by the State Government through their G.O.Ms. No. 575, dated 8.6.2009 as illegal.

The writ petitioner was working as Mandal Revenue Inspector at the relevant point of time. The Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Sanga Reddy, Nizamabad Range, has filed charge sheet against the writ petitioner on the file of the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad, alleging the commission of offences under Sections 7 & 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the petitioner. It is alleged that the original complainant approached the writ petitioner with a request to enter his name and the names of his brothers in the pahanis and in the `record of rights’ based upon certain orders passed by the civil court. For discharging this official act, the writ petitioner was alleged to have demanded a sum of Rs.18,000/- as illegal gratification. Since the complainant was not willing to pay for this illegal gratification, he lodged a complaint with the Anti Corruption Bureau on 7.2.2002. Accordingly, a trap has been laid by the ACB and when the writ petitioner has demanded and accepted a sum of Rs.10,000/- as part of illegal gratification, on 8.2.2002, he has been apprehended. Apart from recovering the illegal gratification from his possession, the phenolphthalein test conducted on the fingers of his both hands yielded a positive result. Hence, the writ petitioner has been proceeded against in CC No. 17 of 2003 before the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad. After a full-fledged trial in the matter, by the judgment and order dated 6.3.2009, the writ petitioner has been convicted, of the charges framed against him under Section 248(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The writ petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment, he was ordered to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one month. The writ petitioner has carried the matter by way of Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 2009 to this court. A Misc. Petition was moved therein seeking suspension of the execution of sentence passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad on 6.3.2009 in CC No. 17 of 2003. Entertaining the said Crl Misc. Petition, this court was pleased to pass an order on 18.3.2009 to the following effect:

“The sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner alone is suspended on the same terms as ordered by the trial court.”

Coming to know of the conviction handed down by the criminal court, the State Government examined the matter and considered that the conduct of the writ petitioner which led to such a conviction was such that his further continuation in public service was undesirable and consequently orders were passed through G.O. Ms. No. 575, Revenue (Vigilance VII) Department, dated 8.6.2009 dismissing the writ petitioner from service with immediate effect, exercising the power available under clause (X) of Rule 9 read with sub-rule (2) of Rule 35 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991. It is this order, which came to be challenged by the writ petitioner in this writ petition.

I have heard Sri P.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel would submit that the conviction handed down by the criminal court in CC No. 17 of 2003 has not attained finality and in fact an appeal preferred by the writ petitioner against the same was admitted and it is pending in this court and this court has already suspended the execution of the sentence imposed by the criminal court and therefore the State Government is not at all justified in proceeding against the writ petitioner and passing the impugned order of imposing the punishment of dismissal from service. According to the learned counsel, any prudent admi