IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.31153 OF 2017 Dated 6^th March, 2026 Between:

Reddimalle Shankaraiah … Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Energy Distribution Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and (3) others … Respondents

ORDER:

Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in denying promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistant Linemen merely on the ground that criminal proceedings are pending against him, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Energy appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri A. Chandra Shekar, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined as Junior Lineman in the year 2007 and posted at Siddannapet New Headquarters. Further, consequent upon registration of Crime No.28/RCT-NMD/2013, dated 26.12.2013, under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, the petitioner was placed under suspension and later he was reinstated into service in the year 2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that though the name of the petitioner is shown at Sl.No.9 in the seniority list of Junior Linemen, his case is not considered for promotion on the ground of pendency of criminal case vide Crime No.28/RCT-NMD/2013, dated 26.12.2013, which was subsequently numbered as C.C.No.150 of 2024 on the file of II Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad. Learned counsel further submits that no departmental proceedings are initiated against the petitioner and therefore mere involvement in a criminal case cannot be a ground for disqualifying the petitioner for promotion when the post is a non-selection post. Promotion can be effected to the employee subject to outcome of the criminal case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as on the date of promotion of juniors of the petitioner i.e. 19.04.2017, the petitioner was not under currency of disciplinary/criminal proceedings. Hence, denial of promotion to the petitioner is not only contrary to G.O.Ms.No.66 dated 30.01.1991 but also the order of this Court dated 19.06.2023 in W.P. No.45490 of 2022 as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Degala Suryanarayana’s case. Therefore, the learned counsel seeks indulgence of this Court and prays to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Lineman without reference to C.C. No.150 of 2024 pending on the file of II Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad.

4) Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel submits that based on the complaint lodged by one Kolupula Anjaneulu about the illegal gratification demanded by the petitioner for fixation of agricultural transformer, the Anti Corruption Bureau laid a trap and the petitioner was caught red-handed on 26.12.2013 while accepting illegal gratification of Rs.13,000/-. As such, he was placed under suspension on 26.12.2013 AN and subsequently he was reinstated into service on 20.06.2016. Vide proceedings dated 07.04.2017, sanction was accorded for prosecuting the petitioner and accordingly a charge sheet was filed against the petitioner for the offences punishable under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act before the II Additional Special Judge’s Court for SPE and ACB Cases, Hyderabad, on 08.08.2017 and the same is numbered as C.C. No.150 of 2024. Further, G.O.Ms.No.257, GAD (SER.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, stipulates that the promotion of the employee against whom grave allegations are leveled should not be considered for promotion until the criminal case is decided. As on the date of filing of the present writ petition, the charge sheet is filed before the ACB Court and suppressing the same, the present writ petition is filed. Therefore, the learned Standing Counsel c