ORDER :

1. Writ Petition No. 703 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“........to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents in not reinstating the petitioner by reviewing the Proceedings C. No. 17/OE/PR/2009, DO No. 769/2014, dated 22.09.2014 of the 4th respondent in imposing the punishment of removal from service and the proceedings C. No. 20/Appeal-P1/2014, RO No. 550/2015, dated 17.12.2015 of the 3rd respondent in enhancing the punishment of Removal from Service to that of dismissal from service despite the petitioner is acquitted from the Criminal Case in S.C. No. 95 of 2011 dated 04.10.2019 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the conduct rules and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits by considering the acquittal of the petitioner in Sessions Case No. 95 of 2011, dated 04.10.2019 forthwith and to pass such other orders.....”

Writ Petition (AT) No. 226 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“........to issue a Writ, to call for the records relating to Proceedings in C. No. 17/OE/PR/2009, DO No. 769/2014, dated 22.09.2014 of the 4th respondent in imposing the punishment of removal from service and the Proceedings C. No. 20/Appeal-P1/2014, RO No. 550/2015, dated 17.12.2015 of the 3rd respondent in upholding the Punishment of Removal from Service as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the rules and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant into service with all consequential benefits forthwith and to pass such other orders.....”

2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, I find it expedient to decide both the matters by common order.

3. For the sake of convenience, W.P. No. 703 of 2020 is taken as leading case.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Services-I for the respondents.

5. The brief case of the petitioner in W.P. No. 703 of 2020 is that initially he was appointed as Police Constable in West Godavari District in the year 1993 and rendered 21 years of service without any remark. While he was working as Police Constable at Narsapuram Town Police Station, West Godavari District, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and framed article of charge. The petitioner submitted his explanation by denying the allegations. Further a case in Crime No. 106 of 2008 was registered; subsequently it was referred as false. Later it was reopened and altered charge. Notwithstanding the pendency of Criminal Case, the Disciplinary Authority has chosen to proceed with the Disciplinary Proceedings though the allegations made against the petitioner are one and same. The Enquiry Officer has not conducted proper enquiry and arrived with wrong conclusion. Therefore the departmental proceedings including the proceedings of enquiry gets vitiated on account of procedural infirmities and on account of the fact of non availability of the evidence to prove the charge of illegal contract and false promise of marriage against the petitioner. Basing on the Enquiry Report, the 4th respondent issued Show-Cause notice to the petitioner, though the petitioner has submitted his explanation, the same was not considered and issued impugned orders imposing a major penalty of removal from service vide proceedings dated 22.09.2014. Assailing the same, the petitioner preferred an Appeal before the 3rd respondent, who issued instructions to the 4th respondent. Basing on the instructions, the 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 25.03.2015 dismissing the petitioner from the service. Meantime, the 4th respondent made fresh allegation in the said penalty of dismissal or