Sk.Aleem Pasha v. Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Limited
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-28. Sk.Aleem Pasha v. Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Limited. Read the judgment and...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Originat Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE TWENTY. EIGHTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND , AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PET ITION NO: 23844 O F 2020 Betwee n: Sl<. Aleem Pasha, S/o-late Shaik I\,4ahaboob, aged 47 years, Occ_Loco Ooerator (Driver G r-r ), (under susoensign l, SEic'HpiKips QIJ io &'M;"kT? E"vI "siri:: Paloncha, Bhadradri Kothaquderii Oislr[r ... PETITIONER AND 1 Telangana Stale Power Generation Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and l\,4anagrng Director, Vidyuth Soudha, " Xfriiratn-iOjOlUyO'eratiaO-Si. - 2 The Chief Engineer (O & tV), Vll Stage, KTpS paloncha, Bhadradri Kothagudem District ...
RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court mly 6" pLar"o to issue an order/direction or wrrt more particularly one in the nature of writ of declaring the charge lr,4emo Dtd-24l01r2o1g ! anla1us and Revised charge lt4emo Dtd-0410312020 issued by the 2nd Respondent Authority pracing the petitiorier under deemed suspension as ilegar, arbitrary, contrary to the materiir on iecord, o. rio", violative of Article 21 of the constitution of lndii, consequenfly set aside the same directing the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service forthwith and pay all attendant benefits including back wages.
fA NO: 't OF 2020 Petition under Section 'l s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service torttrwiitr by suspendhg the charge lr,4emo Dtd-24lo1l2o1g & Revised charge Memo Dtd:04/oitzozo issued by the 2nd Respondent Authority. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA Counsel forthe Respondents: SMT. A. DEEPTHI, SC FOR GENCO The Courl made the following: ORDER KUMAR SHAVILI THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND /t of 2020 WRIT PETITI ONN o. 23844 ORDER: stage disposed of at the admission This writ petition is beirrg of both the pafiies' with the consent fited seeking the fbilorving rcliel': This rvlit petition is $tit lli\rlc ".... 1o irir.
lc Jn or(lcr (lilccti('n ur natrtrc ot \Vrit of Manclarrtls particularl)', one in the cleclaring thc charge memo clatccl 24 0I 2019 and Revised charge memo dated 04 03 2020 issued by the the petitioner under 2nd respondent authority placing to the illegal, arbitrary' contrary deemed suspension as violative of Article 21 of the material on record, besides the same Constitution of India, consequently set aside the herein to reinstate directing the respondents forthwith and pay all attendant petitioner into service benefits including back wages and to pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest ol'iustice. " Heard Sri V. Jithender Rao, counsel for the petitioner' and for the respondents' Smt. A. Deepthi, Standing Counsel appearing the respondents by the petitioner that It has been contended 24 '01'2019 and a revised him on have issued a charge memo against charge memo on 04. 03.
2020' Pursuant thereto' the petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation and thereafter a regular depaflmental I enquiry was conducted' The Enquiry Officer has submitted his repott on 30. 06. 2020. Counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner on, as of now has challenged the charge memo in the present writ petiti -t ) thc petitionel confined his argunrent only to direct the disciplinarl' a reasonablc proceedings r'vithin autholitl"to conclude the disciplinary that appropriate ordet's counsel contended per. iod ot'time.
Therelbre, authority to disciplinary be passed in the writ petition directing the petitioner against the proceedings initiated conclude the disciplinary period of time' within a reasonable contended appearing for the respondents had Standing Counsel reporl' the submitted his that since the Enquiry Officer has disciplinary proceedings conclude the clisciplinary authority would period of tirne' rvithin a reasonable b1' consiclerecl the rival subnlissions tnacle This Court. having vieri' that is ol'the corlsiderccl lbr respectivc parties' lerrnecl cottnsel disciplirraty of clirecting thc be disposed this ti'rit petition can against the proceedings initiated authority to conclude the disciplinary petitionerrvithinareasonableperiodoftime'preferablywithinthree order' copy date of receipt ol a of this months lrom the Withtlreabovedirections'thiswritpetitionisdisposedof. No order as to costs. shall stand closed' petitions, ifany' Pending miscellaneous sD/- K.
ON M ASSISTANT REG RAR //TRUE COPYil SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The chairman and lVlanaging Director, Terangana State power Generation - -'- ' Corporation Limited, Vidy-uil-iSou-dha, Khairaihabad, HyOeraOiO_ai ^ 2. The Chief Engineer (O & M), Vil Stage, KTPS patonchi, efiJrd, Xothagudem District 3 CC to Sri. Jithender Qne Rao Veeramalla, Advocate [OpUC] t_o Smr A. Deepthi, SC for GENCO 1 9n" 99 tOpUCl 5. Two CD Copies. Pr\4 ts-gOURT HIGH DATED:2811212020 1 He s T4 16 <, s^ o o 04 JAil|2021 o * c (" ORDER of 2020 WP. No. 23844 Disposing of the WP Without costs. \
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.