THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION No.16794 of 2025 ORDER : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr.M.Surender Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr.Dharmesh D K Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Harender Pershad, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr.A.Naren Rudra, learned Standing counsel for the High Court appearing for respondent No.1 and Ms.M.Shalini, learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed being aggrieved of the action on the part of the 1^st respondent in excluding the petitioner from participating in the promotion process to the cadre of District Judge (Entry Level) from the cadre of Civil Judges (Senior division) under the 65% quota for the year 2025.

3. It appears that the petitioner was left out from the list of eligible candidates on the sole ground that the petitioner has actually not worked for the minimum required period of five years as a Civil Judge (Senior division).

4. However, through the present writ petition, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has brought to the notice of the Bench that at one point of time, the petitioner was subjected to a disciplinary proceedings and which resulted in the exoneration by the inquiry officer. The disciplinary authority differed from the findings given by the inquiry officer and had proceeded and inflicted a major punishment for stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect with effect from 13.10.2016. The said order was subjected to challenge in W.P.No.8588 of 2017, the Division Bench of this High Court, vide its judgment, dated 30.12.2021, has allowed the said writ petition and while allowing the said writ petition, the Division Bench of this Court had made the following observations:

In the light of the aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the opinion that as the charges have not been proved based upon the evidence adduced during departmental enquiry, the findings arrived at by the disciplinary authority are perverse findings.

Resultantly, the order passed by the High Court dated 13.10.2016 is hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled for all the consequential benefits flowing out of this order.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

5. Pursuant to the allowing of the writ petition which was not further challenged before any other higher forum, the 1^st respondent implemented the said order by setting aside the major penalty proceedings, dated 13.10.2016, vide its order, dated

26.02.2022, wherein the 1^st respondent made the following order:

While so, having taken into consideration the order, dated 30.12.2021 passed in W.P.No.8588 of 2017 of the Hon’ble Court, the High Court hereby set aside the major penalty proceedings, dated 13.10.2016 withholding of two increments with cumulative effect.

6. Pursuant to the order, dated 26.02.2022, the 1^st respondent further passed an order giving effect to the setting aside of the punishment order, vide order, dated 02.08.2022. The order of the

1^st respondent, dated 02.08.2022 reads as under:

Having considered the representations submitted by (1) Smt.A.Sreedevi, Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, and (2) Mrs.RAdhika Jaiswal, Secretary, Metropolitan Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, requesting to restore their seniority in the category of Senior Civil Judges, the High Court decided to restore the seniority of the officers as was in the category of Junior Civil Judges.

Accordingly, the seniorityof (1)

Smt.A.Sreedevi, Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, is restored in the category of Senior Civil Judges in between at L.B.Nagar, is restored in the category of Senior Civil Judges in between Ms.Sheetal D.B. and Sri C.Vikram