O R D E R:

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to call for the records relating to charge memo issued in Memorandum No.A6/PR/11/2015, dated 19.05.2016 by the 1^st respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the orders of Hon’ble Apex Court and this Hon’ble Court and set aside the same on the ground of departmental enquiry and criminal case on same set of facts and also delay and latches with a consequential direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Head Constable (Civil) along with others with all consequential benefits and pass…”

2. Heard Sri Rajashekar Tallapally, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Police Constable (Civil) on 07.09.1993 in Medak District and while, he was working at Ramayampet Police Station, he was suspended from duty on 09.01.2009. Subsequently, on 04.04.2009, a case in Crime No.83 of 2009 on the file of Ramayampet Police Station, was registered against the petitioner for the offence alleged under Sections 353, 341, 504 and 510 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. After filing of charge sheet, the case was numbered as C.C.No.338 of 2009 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile) at Medak. However, during the pendency of above criminal case, the petitioner was reinstated into service on 04.06.2010 and the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him were dropped vide proceedings, dated 04/05.08.2012. The trial Court, after conducting trial, acquitted the petitioner from the criminal case vide judgment, dated 03.10.2012 and the said order became final. Thereafter, respondent No.1 issued impugned charge memo, dated 19.05.2016 on the ground that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.83 of 2009. It is further submitted that the said charge memo was issued nearly seven years after the registration of crime. The facts and evidence in impugned charge memo, dated 19.05.2016 and C.C.No.338 of 2009 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile) at Medak are one and the same. Since the criminal charges and the departmental charges are identical and that the evidence is also same, the departmental proceedings are liable to be set aside on this ground alone. Further, the issue was relating to the incident occurred on 03.04.2009 and the charge memo was issued on 19.05.2016 i.e., after long lapse of seven years. Further, as per G.O.Ms.No.679, dated 01.11.2008, enquiry in simple cases should be completed within three months and in complicated cases within six months and as per Rule 20 of TSCS (CCA) Rules, 1991, time is fixed in every stage of enquiry to complete it as per the schedule fixed. However, the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner have not been finalized so far. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to set aside the impugned charge memo No.A6/PR/11/2015, dated 19.05.2016. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in G.M.Tank v. State of Gujarat1, order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2826 of 2013, dated 26.04.2013 and order, dated 06.12.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.7020 of 2023.

4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for the respondents submits that while the petitioner was working at Ramayampet Police Station, he was suspended from service

1 2006 (5) SCC 446

vide proceedings, dated 09.01.2009 on the alleged ground of misconduct and he was reinstated into duty on 04.06.2010. After conducting departmental enquiry, the charges leveled against the petitioner were not prov