Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23410 (AP)

KUMBA NAGA BAJI v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/21867/2025 · 2026-01-20

D Ramesh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010420522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 21867/2025 Between: 1. KUMBA NAGA BAJI, S/O. MANGA RAO, AGED 33 YEARS. OCC HOMEGUARD-285, (DISMISSED FROM SERVICE), R/O. H.NO.2-13, KRISHNAPURAM COLONY, PENUMACHA VILLAGE PAMIDIMUKKALA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HOME GUARDS, MANGALAGIRI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NORTH DIVISION, VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT. 5. THE RESERVE INSPECTOR, HOME GUARDS, VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT ...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 any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned proceedings C.No.2677/H1/2021 (D.O.No.29/2021) dt.12.11.2021. removing the petitioner from service as illegal, arbitrary and violative of article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same by directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service in view of the acquittal in C.C. No. 404 of 2022 dated 04.10.2023 in the court of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gannavaram and grant all consequential benefits and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 C.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V VINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: “…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned proceedings C.No.2677/H1/2021 (D.O.No.29/2021) dt.12.11.2021, removing the petitioner from service as illegal, arbitrary and violative of article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same by directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service in view of the acquittal in C.C.No.404 of 2022 dated 04.10.2023 in the court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge- cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gannavaram and grant all consequential benefits and to pass such other order or orders.….” 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was terminated from his service on 12.11.2021 vide proceedings in C.No.2677/H1/2021, based on the alleged involvement in a crime in C.C.No.404 of 2022. The C.C.No.404 of 2022 ended in acquittal vide order dated 04.10.2023 by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gannavaram. Subsequently after the acquittal, the petitioner has made a representation for reinstatement him into his services along with order copy. Despite the same, the respondents have not passed any order. 3. Once the removal is based on the involvement in Crime in C.C.No.404 of 2022 and when the said C.C. was ended in acquittal and the same was brought to the notice of the authorities, the authorities ought to have considered and passed appropriate orders by reinstating the petitioner into service. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Service-I requests time to verify as to whether any disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner. 5. Since this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case and upon considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated November, 2024, by taking into the consideration of the observations made by the competent Court i.e., the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Gannavaram in C.C.No.404 of 2022 and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 21.01.2026 M K K 198 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.21867 of 2025 Dated: 21.01.2026 M K K