Acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle a suspended employee to salary or benefits unless aligned with governmental regulations.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This writ petition was filed questioning the order in O.A.No.7427 of 2014 on the file of erstwhile A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad dated

17.11.2016.

3. The respondent herein filed the above said O.A. questioning the proceedings of the 4^th respondent therein/ 4^th petitioner herein in C.No.178/PR/2001 dated 13.11.2002 and the orders of the 1^st respondent therein/ 1^st petitioner herein in Memo No.10567/Ser-II/A1/2013, dated 22.05.2013 rejecting the applicant’s request for regularization of suspension period from 29.09.2001 to 17.04.2002 and out of employment period from

17.11.2002 to 20.03.2007.

4. As per the brief facts, the respondent herein worked as Heard Constable at Mydukur II Town Police Station of Kadapa District and the Crime No.84 of 2001 for the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC was registered against him and two others. A common charge sheet was filed before the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class vide C.C.No.389 of 2001. Consequently, the respondent was placed under suspension from 29.09.2001 to 17.04.2002 because of his alleged involvement in the above said criminal case. Ultimately, the trial court vide its judgment dated

21.10.2002 convicted the respondent herein/ applicant therein for the offence punishable under Section 411 IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years.

5. Against the said judgment, the 1^st respondent therein filed the above said Criminal Appeal No.279 of 2002 on the file of II Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Proddatur and the same was allowed on 10.03.2003. While the said criminal appeal was pending, the 4^th petitioner herein by order dated 13.11.2002 dismissed the respondent herein from service on account of his conviction in C.C.No.389 of 2001. Consequent upon allowing of the above said appeal and in pursuance of the directions of the erstwhile Tribunal in O.A.No.4441 of 2004, the respondent herein was reinstated into service in the year 2007. Then the respondent herein/ applicant therein filed number of representations before the 4^th petitioner herein and other petitioners herein requesting them to regularize the suspension and out of employment period as duty with all consequential benefits.

6. In view of the pending of the above said criminal case, the departmental enquiry was held against the respondent herein and the enquiry officer submitted his report dated 05.06.2008 holding that charge was not proved. But the 4^th petitioner herein vide Memo dated 11.07.2008 disagreed with the findings of the enquiry officer and after considering the explanation of the respondent herein/ applicant therein/ delinquent, imposed the punishment of PPI (Postponement of Increment) for three years with effect on future increments vide proceedings dated 29.10.2008.

7. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent herein/ applicant therein/ delinquent filed revision before the 1^st petitioner herein and the 1^st petitioner considering the material available on record modified the punishment of PPI for three years with effect on future increments and pension already awarded to him to the effect of PPI for one year with effect on future increments and pension vide proceedings dated 11.11.2009. Even aggrieved by the same, the respondent herein/ applicant therein/ delinquent made representation to the 1^st petitioner herein dated 09.09.2010 to set aside the modified punishment of PPI for one year. While so, the Criminal Appeal No.1458 of 2005 filed by the petitioners herein was dismissed vide order dated 31.10.2012. Consequently, the respondent herein/ applicant therein/ the delinquent made another rep