Gattigorla Shankar vs The State Of Telangana & Ors.

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the order dated 21.02.2018 passed by respondent No.3, rejecting the petitioner's claim for reinstatement and appointment as SCT PC (TSSP), 2^nd Battalion, TSSP (IR), Adilabad District, on the ground of his alleged involvement in Crime No.25 of 2014 on the file of Nakrekal Police Station, Nalgonda District, despite his acquittal in S.C. No.75 of 2014 by judgment dated 19.10.2015, and despite the judgment of the Division Bench reported in 2015 (2) ALT 628, as followed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.2106 of 2021 dated 25.10.2021, as illegal and arbitrary; and consequently, to declare that the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement and appointment as SCT PC (TSSP), 2^nd Battalion, TSSP (IR), Adilabad District, with all consequential benefits, including seniority and other attendant benefits, on par with his batch mates.

Heard Sri Ch. Ravindar, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4; and Sri C. Rajashekar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board, for respondent No.3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the recruitment notification dated 31.12.2015 issued by respondent No.3 inviting applications for various posts, the petitioner participated in the selection process and was provisionally selected for the post of SCT PC (TSSP), 2nd Battalion, TSSP (IR), Adilabad District. Consequent upon verification of the petitioner's antecedents, his provisional selection was cancelled by proceedings dated 03.07.2017 on the ground of his involvement in Crime No.25 of 2014 on the file of Nakrekal Police Station, Nalgonda District, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.4. However, the petitioner had already been acquitted by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, in S.C. No.75 of 2014, vide judgment dated 19.10.2015. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. No.28442 of 2017, wherein by order dated 06.12.2017, the cancellation proceedings were set aside and the respondents were directed to reconsider the petitioner's case in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Avtar Singh v. Union of India. However, the respondents again rejected the petitioner's claim vide impugned proceedings dated 21.02.2018, without assigning any valid reasons. It is further submitted that accused No.1 in the very same S.C. No.75 of 2014 was also acquitted and as he was denied appointment despite his acquittal in the said case, he approached this Court by filing W.P. No.25870 of 2022 seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case and issue the appointment order. This Court, by an order dated 21.12.2023 in W.P. No.25870 of 2022, directed respondent No.1 therein to issue the appointment letter to the petitioner therein i.e., accused No.1 with all consequential benefits and send him for training along with the next batch being sent for training. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent-Recruitment Board filed W.A. No.1185 of 2024 and, vide judgment dated 17.10.2024, the said Writ Appeal was dismissed, confirming the order dated 21.12.2023. Subsequently, the judgment dated 17.10.2024 in W.A. No.1185 of 2024 was also confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.25579 of 2025, dated 27.01.2026. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner prays this Court to pass similar order in the present Writ Petition also.

The above made submission is not seriously disputed by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and for the reasons alike in the order dated 21.12.2023 in W.P. No.25870 of 2022, which was confirmed vide judgment dated 17.10.2024 in W.A. No.1185 of 2024 and the order dated 27.01.2026 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No.25579 of 2025, this Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 21.02.2018 passed by respondent No.3. Consequently, the respondents are directed to issue appointment letter to the petitioner with all consequential benefits and send him for training along with the next available batch.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.