SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 68429

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J
Anarapu Srinivas – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No. 4587 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kadire Krishnaiah
For the Respondents: Government Pleader for Services (Home)

The penalty of removal from service is disproportionate when the period of unauthorized absence is attributed to chronic or serious health issues (specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic) and the employee has a long, distinguished service record, despite a history of past disciplinary lapses.

Headnote:(A) Telengana Civil Services (CC&A) Rules, 1991 - Rule 20 - Unauthorized absence - Police personnel - Removal from service, proportionality of punishment.

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Police Constable with approximately 30 years of service, was removed from service following desertion proceedings for unauthorized absence between March 2021 and August 2021. The petitioner contended that he suffered from severe health issues, including COVID-19, and attempted to rejoin duties, citing documentary evidence of his illness and the fact that medical expenses were reimbursed by the department.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that while the petitioner had a history of unauthorized absences and the current conduct was correctly identified as desertion, the punishment of 'removal from service' was disproportionate given the petitioner's long tenure, receipt of awards for service, and the verified health complications. The court noted the contradiction in the department granting medical reimbursement for the period of illness while simultaneously using the absence during that same period as the primary ground for removal from service.

Issues: Whether the order of removal from service is disproportionate to the misconduct and evidence of medical necessity submitted by the employee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an employee has rendered long years of service and the period of absence is linked to verified critical medical conditions, the extreme penalty of removal is disproportionate if lesser penalties were sufficient for previous instances of similar misconduct.

Result: Writ Petition allowed; removal order set aside, and authorities directed to impose a lesser punishment.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges removal from service, citing health reasons (covid-19) for unauthorized absence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
2. respondents justify removal based on habitual desertion and failure to follow duty/leave instructions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
3. removal set aside as disproportionate punishment; authorities ordered to reconsider lesser penalty. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide proceedings No.704/T4/2022, dated 18.11.2023, as confirmed by the 3rd respondent by his order vide C.No.A5/03/1553/PR/0E/2022 (1407), dated 18.10.2022 vide C.O.O.No. 1056/2022, in removing the services of the petitioner as PC.170, Muttaram PS, Peddapalli District, as illegal.

2. Heard Sri Kadire Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services (Home), appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was selected as a police constable and was appointed on 10.08.1990. Ever since of the date of his appointment, the petitioner has rendered his services to the department in various places as a Police Constable and received awards and rewards for his outstanding services. On a term wise basis, he was allotted for Tamilnadu Election bundobust duty, and the same was intimated to him over a phone call on 23.04.2021 at 07.45 hours. On 25.03.2021, petitioner was handed over the counter file slip of summons while he was working as a Police Constable at Pothkapalli Police Station, Commissionerate of Police, Ramagundam. After completion of the summons duty, he was affected with severe hypertension and chest pain suddenly. Subsequently, he sent a message through WhatsApp to the Sub Inspector of Police, Pothkapalli.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner immediately rushed to the Hospital for treatment on 26.03.2021. The Medical Officer, TSVVP, Godhavarikani, advised the petitioner to take at least 10 days bed rest due to CAD, Hypertension emergency, with effect from 26.03.2021 to 05.04.2021, and he certified the same by issuing "Form-A." After hearing this fact, the petitioner informed the Sub Inspector of Police about his health condition and requested that a Sick Passport be issued duly enclosing the out Patient Card and a doctor’s certificate. Due to these reasons, the Petitioner was unable to attend duties from 26.03.2021 to 10.04.2021.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner went to the P.S. on 11.04.2021 to join in his duties and also requested the Sub Inspector, Pothkapalli, to permit him to join duties. But, the Sub Inspector did not consider his request. Again, the petitioner went to attend the duties on the next day i.e., 12.04.2021 and requested the Sub Inspector to permit him to join duties, but the same was rejected. The Petitioner had been waiting for the duties from 9:00.A.M to 5:00.P.M., but the Sub Inspector of Police, Pothakapalli, did not take him into the duties on the next day either.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the said circumstances, the petitioner went to the officer of the Inspector of Police to meet him personally to make a representation to take him into the duties on 14.04.2021, but the Inspector of Police was not available in the office on that day. As such, he informed the Inspector of Police over the cell phone about what had happened.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that later, the petitioner again fell sick severely, immediately rushed to the Hospital and on test, detected COVID positive on 16.04.2021. Immediately, he rushed to Aryan Care & Cure Hospital Karimnagar, and after giving first aid, they refused to admit the petitioner as the petitioner’s c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top