An employee acquitted of charges is entitled to consideration for promotion from the date of eligibility, despite prior disciplinary proceedings, upholding the principle of just treatment in administrative decisions.

ORDER :

Challa Gunaranjan, J.

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:-

"...pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the promotion of the Petitioner for the post of Assistant Administrative Officer/Administrative Officer, which are non-selection posts despite there being no punishment imposed for withholding the punishment as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Rule 5(b)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 and consequently direct the respondents to affect promotion to the Petitioner to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer with effect from 31.07.2021 and consequently Administrative Officer with effect from 08.12.2022 when his immediate juniors were promoted with all the incidental and consequential benefits therein and pass such other order or orders....”

2. Heard Smt Pulipati Radhika, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondents.

3. Petitioner is working as Office Superintendent. He was eligible and entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer. By proceedings dated 31.07.2021, panel of Office Superintendents fit for promotion as Assistant Administrative Officers for the panel year 2020-2021 came to be issued, pursuant to which the persons mentioned therein were effected promotions. It is stated that though petitioner was eligible to be considered for promotion, at that point of time, on account of pendency of criminal case vide C.C.No.157 of 2017 on the file of learned Judicial case Magistrate of First Class, Guntur, his case was not considered and rather, all his junior were promoted. Subsequently, vide judgment dated 21.07.2022, the criminal case against the petitioner ended in acquittal. Thereafter, petitioner has submitted representations dated 25.07.2022 and 02.08.2022 requesting the respondents to consider his case for promotion retrospectively, with reference to the panel year 2021-2022. The said request ultimately did not fructify into any conclusion. Later, though respondents have called for an exercise to undertake promotions for the panel years 2022-2023 and 2023- 2024, no promotions came to be effected. In the interregnum, based certain complaints given by some third parties alleging that on petitioner had borrowed some amounts and could not repay the same, inquiry came to be conducted against him. Pursuant to the inquiry, he was placed under suspension on 28.11.2023 and subsequently, came to be reinstated on 19.04.2024. A charge memo issued on 08.02.2024, to which he submitted statement of was defence, and the inquiry is stated to be pending. As the promotional post being non-selection post, mere pendency of departmental inquiry could not be an impediment for considering the case of petitioner for promotion, in view of Rule 5(b)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Sub-ordinate Service Rules, 1996. As the case of petitioner is not being considered for promotion, and that his juniors were already promoted, he preferred present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly, when promotions were effected for the panel year 2020-2021, the petitioner, though eligible and falling within the zone of consideration for promotion, was not considered merely on account of pendency of criminal case, whereas all his juniors were promoted. But for the pendency of aforesaid criminal proceedings, he in natural course would have been promoted. As subsequently the criminal case ended in honourable acquitt