APHC010487882024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 25545/2024 Between: 1. KATIKALAPUDI SATYANARAYANA, S/O VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED LINE INSPECTOR, APEPDCL, RESIDING AT H.NO. 145/2, NIDADAVOLE ROAD, YERNAGUDEM VILLAGE, DEVARAPALLI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 2. KOTIKALAPUDI SEETHARATNAM, W/O KATIKALAPUDI SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, RESIDEING AT H.NO.145/2, NIDADAVOLE ROAD, YERNAGUDEM VILLAGE, DEVARAPALLI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. PETITIONER NO.2 BROUGHT ON RECORD AS LR TO THE DECEASED 1ST PETITIONER, AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 02.07.2025 VIDE I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 IN WP NO.25545 OF 2024. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,THULLURU MANDAL, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA 2 PRADESH LIMITED, (APEPDCL), REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, SEETHAMMADHARA, PANDIT COLONY VISAKHAPATNAM -530013. 3. THE DIRECTOR, HRD AND FINANCE, APEPDCL, CORPORATE OFFICE, SEETHAMMADHARA, PANDIT COLONY VISAKHAPATNAM -530013. 4. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, HRD AND LEGAL, APEPDCL, CORPORATE OFFICE, SEETHAMMADHARA, PAND T COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM -530013. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, APEPDCL, VIDYUT BHAVAN, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI. DISTRICT. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATION DIVISION, APEPDCL, NIDADAVOLU, EAST GODAVARI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents not extending the service and pensionary benefits to the petitioner, only on the ground of Conviction in the ACB case by the respondents without any reason, even though acquittal in the said ACB case on 23.01.2024 in CRLA.1324 of 2008 is illegal, arbitrary and unjust violation of Art 14and 16 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider representations dated 27.02.204 and 18.09.2024 granting service benefits of pension and Terminal benefits including promotion as per the seniority and monetary benefits treating the Suspension period from 22.11.2003 as on Leave to which the petitioner is eligible duly adjusting the subsistence allowances already drawn by him against the pay and allowances and Dismissal period as on duty in terms of APSEB Regulations, with all other attendant benefits with consequential 3 benefits duly adding NMR service rendered from 16.05.1969 to 16.07.1977 including seniority and all kinds of Terminal and pensioner benefits on par with orders passed by this Hon’ble court dated 21.04.2017 in WP.4144 of 2015 by allowing the writ petition and pass such other order. IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the respondent to consider the representation dated 22.07.2024 and 18.09.2024 to extend the service benefits including seniority and all other attendant benefits with consequential benefits duly adding NMR service rendered from 16.05.1969 to 16.07.1977 including seniority and all kinds of Terminal and pensionery benefits pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order. IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner/Proposed Petitioner No. 2 to come on record as Legal Representative of deceased sole Writ Petitioner in WP No. 25545 of 2024 and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KINTALI DHARMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENERGY 2. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) The Court made the following: 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.25545 of 2024 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of Respondents in not extending the service and pensionary benefits to the Petitioner in spite of acquittal in CRL.A.No.1324 of 2008 on 23.01.2024, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts in brief are as follows; The Petitioner had jointed in the erstwhile A.P. Electricity Board on 16.05.1969 as NMR in the Yernagudem Sub-Station. Subsequently, the Petitioner was promoted as Helper in regular service on 06.07.1977 and was promoted as Assistant Lineman, Lineman and Line Inspector respectively. While so, on the basis of a trap, a criminal case was registered against the Petitioner by the ACB authorities vide Crime No.13/RCT-EWG/2003 for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the same was numbered as C.C.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the Special Judge for S.P.E & A.C.B. Cases, Vijayawada. 5 3. After registration of the criminal case against the Petitioner, the Petitioner was initially suspended from service vide Memo No.DEE/O/NDD/Adm/C.4/D.No.115/2003, dated 25.11.2003 and thereafter the Petitioner had retired from service on 31.07.2004. In view of the pendency of the criminal case, the retirement benefits were not paid to the Petitioner. 4. The Special Judge for S.P.E & A.C.B Cases, Vijayawada after conducting trial convicted the Petitioner vide Judgment on 29.10.2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) R/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act and also to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Act. The Petitioner thereafter filed CRL.A.No.1234 of 2008 before this Court. 6 5. After acquittal in the Criminal Appeal, the Petitioner submitted representations enclosing the copy of the Judgment of this Court in CRL.A.No.1234 of 2008, dated 23.01.2024. However, the Respondents are not releasing the terminal benefits. Hence, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 6. A Counter Affidavit has been filed by the Respondents wherein the acquittal in the Criminal Appeal by this Court was acknowledged and copy of the Judgment was also filed along with the Counter Affidavit. It is also admitted that after passing of order in Criminal Appeal, a representation was submitted by the Petitioner on 22.07.2024 in view of retirement benefits and thereafter the Counter Affidavit is mostly with reference to various internal correspondence the Respondents had. 7. Heard Sri Metta Chendra Sekhar Rao, learned Senior Counsel for Sri Kintali Dharma Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri V.V. Satish, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 8. Reasoning: In the Criminal Appeal, the Petitioner was acquitted. Paragraph Nos.37, 38 and 39 thereof are extracted below; 7 “37. In view of the aforesaid facts and settled proposition of law, it is unsafe to place an implicit reliance on the evidence adduced by the prosecution for convicting the accused officer. There is no legal evidence to find the accused officer guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of the Act, 1988 levelled against him. 38. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court no hesitation to hold that the prosecution failed to establish its case against the accused officer for the offences under Sections 7 and 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of the Act, 1988, beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused officer is entitled to acquittal. The trial Court did not consider these aspects in right perspective in passing the impugned judgment. 39. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed, setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded against appellant/accused officer in the judgment dated 29.10.2008 in C.C.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the Special Judge for S.P.E & A.C.B Cases, Vijayawada. The appellant/ accused officer is found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and is accordingly acquitted of the said offences. Fine amounts, if any, paid by the appellant/accused officer shall be refunded to him.” 9. In the light of the acquittal in the Criminal Appeal, there is no justifiable reason for the Respondents in not disbursing the retirement benefits due to the Petitioner. The stand taken by the 8 Respondents in the Counter Affidavit does not have any merit for the delay in disbursal of pensionary benefits in spite of the representations enclosing copy of Judgment delivered by this Court in CRL.A.No.1234 of 2008, dated 23.01.2024. 10. In that view, the Writ Petition is allowed with the following directions; (i) The Respondents are directed to pay retirement benefits to the Petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; (ii) The Respondents shall also independently examine for regularization of the suspension period i.e. from 25.11.2003 till the date of retirement i.e. on 31.07.2004 and pass appropriate orders thereon within three (3) months from the date of receipt of the order; (iii) No order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 24.09.2025 IS 9 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.25545 of 2024 Date: 24.09.2025 IS