HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT PETITION No.23520 OF 2021 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

The Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) in O.A.No.3339 of 2014, dated 08.08.2016.

2. Heard Sri M.Surender Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri M.Srinivas Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.V.Rama Rao, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that initially the petitioner was appointed as Police Constable on 22.11.2002 and he has been discharging his duties to the best satisfaction of his superiors and everyone concerned. Learned counsel further contended that the petitioner had responded to a notification dated 30.12.2008 issued by respondent No.2 for filling up the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Sub Inspector of Police (Civil/AR/APSP), as there is

5% quota earmarked for Police Executive Service. Pursuance to the said notification, the petitioner has participated in the regular selection process and he was provisionally selected to the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Sub Inspector of Police. On 29.09.2011, Deputy Inspector General of Police, directed him to report before the R.I (AR)(Admn), Karimnagar and to submit an Attestation Form by 07.10.2011.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner had further contended that the petitioner was falsely implicated in a criminal case i.e., Crime No.56 of 2009 and on charge sheet being filed against him in the said crime, the same was numbered as S.C.No.581 of 2010 on the file of the Judge, Family Court – cum – Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar. Further, the petitioner was also involved in C.C.No.16 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for PCR Cases, Warangal. The petitioner in both the cases was acquitted by the competent criminal Courts vide judgments, dated 18.06.2013 and 09.08.2010 rendered in S.C.No.581 of 2010 and C.C.No.16 of 2010, respectively. He further contended that as the petitioner was involved in criminal cases, the respondents have not given any appointment to him as Sub Inspector of Police.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner had further contended that the disciplinary authority has initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner alleging that he was involved in criminal cases and other irregularities and after conducting detailed enquiry, the disciplinary authority has imposed the punishment of reduction in time scale of pay by five stages for a period of five years with effect on future increments.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner had further contended that aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Sub Inspector of Police consequent upon his selection, the petitioner has approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.3339 of 2014 and the Tribunal vide order dated 08.08.2016, dismissed the O.A., without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioner.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner had further contended that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh V.

Union of India, [(2016) 8 SCC 471], has formulated certain guidelines with regard to considering the cases of the persons, who were involved in criminal cases and were acquitted and the persons, who have suppressed about the involvement in criminal cases. The case of the petitioner also deserves to be considered in terms of the guidelines framed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh’s case (supra). The Tribunal ought to have directed the respondents to examine the case of the petitioner as to whether the acquittal of the petitioner comes in the way of his appointment as Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Sub Inspector of Police. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ