K.Srinivasulu v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.15659 OF 2017 ORDER:

1.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of suspension from service dated 24.04.2017.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to contend that performance of the petitioner is far better when compared to the others and the petitioner is due for promotion. Therefore, deliberately the suspension is resorted only to victimise the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to rely on the material placed on record to show that there was no scope for the petitioner to indulge in incurring excess expenditure without execution of work as alleged in the order of suspension. 3.

It is not in dispute that the second respondent is competent to place the petitioner under suspension. Further, under Rule 33 of the A.P. Civil Services (CC & A) Rules, 1991, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal against the order impugned. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition since the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy in the form of appeal. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to fix some time limit for passing orders in appeal. 4.

Having regard to the said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order of suspension dated 24.04.2017. In the event of filing an appeal within two days from today, the same shall be disposed of, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four weeks thereafter. If there is any possibility of promotions to the next post before considering his case, the Government shall

consider passing orders before taking up promotions. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

____________________ (P.NAVEEN RAO, J) 27th April 2017 RRB