P. Raja Narasinga Rao vs. The State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioners, employees of Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (TGSPDCL), filed multiple writ petitions challenging their continued suspension beyond the prescribed two-year period. They contended that this prolonged suspension was illegal, arbitrary, and violated principles of natural justice, as well as specific government orders (G.O.s) and Article 14 of the Constitution. The petitioners sought reinstatement into service, citing their representations for consideration. The petitions were filed in 2025, with suspension periods commencing in 2022 and 2023. The respondents are the State of Telangana and various officials of TGSPDCL.

Held

The Court held that the action of the respondents in continuing the petitioners under suspension beyond the prescribed period of two years was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court recorded the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL, on instructions, that a review meeting was held on 09.09.2024, and a decision was taken to reinstate the petitioners into service. The Court directed respondent No.1 (State of Telangana) to act upon the decision taken during the review meeting dated 09.09.2024 and issue suitable directions to respondents No.2 and 3 (TGSPDCL authorities) for the immediate reinstatement of the petitioners. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the continued suspension of the petitioners beyond the prescribed period of two years, as stipulated by G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 08.03.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.526 dated 19.08.2008, is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's argument: The petitioners argued that their prolonged suspension, exceeding two years, was contrary to the established government orders which set a prescribed period for suspension. They contended that such continuation was arbitrary and violated their fundamental right to natural justice and equality under Article 14. Revenue/State's argument: The respondents, represented by the learned Standing Counsel for TGSPDCL, on instructions, submitted that a review meeting was conducted on 09.09.2024, where a decision was taken to reinstate the petitioners. This decision was recently communicated to the relevant authorities.