ORDER : 1. Heard Sri G.V.S. Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Assailing the proceedings C. No. 782/PR/Genl./2024, ROO No. 476/2024, dated 23.10.2024 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service, the above writ petition was filed. 3. C.C. No. 197 of 2014 was registered against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short “DP Act”). The petitioner is arrayed as A-1 and was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year. The learned Magistrate also directed the petitioner to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for two months. 4. Against the said calendar and judgment, the petitioner filed Crl. A. No. 47 of 2024 on the file of Principal District Judge, Vizianagaram. The Appellate Court in Crl. M.P. No. 369 of 2024 suspended the sentence of imprisonment alone pending disposal of the appeal. In respect of the conviction, the Appellate Court declined to suspend the conviction. The petitioner filed Crl. R.C. No. 908 of 2024. A coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 22.10.2024 allowed the Criminal Revision Case. The operative portion of the order reads as follows: “In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed. The conviction of the revision petitioner/A.1 imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Cheepurupalli in the judgment dated 27.08.2024 in C.C.No. 197 of 2014 is suspended. To that extent, the prayer made in Crl. M.P. No. 369 of 2024 in Crl. A. No. 47 of 2024 on the file of the learned Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram stands allowed. Thus, the prayers for suspension of conviction and suspension of execution of sentence prayed by this revision petitioner in Crl. M.P. No. 369 of 2024 in Crl. A. No. 47 of 2024 stand granted. This order holds good till the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2024 by the learned Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.” 5. After the order dated 22.10.2024 in Crl. M.P. No. 369 of 2024 in Crl. A. No. 47 of 2024 stand granted. This order holds good till the disposal of Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2024 by the learned Special Judge for trial of offences against Women-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.” 5. After the order dated 22.10.2024 in Crl. R.C. by proceedings impugned, the petitioner was dismissed from service despite the suspension of conviction of revision petitioner/A.1 in C.C. No. 197 of 2014. 6. This Court earlier dealt with the dismissal of the employee despite the stay/suspension of the conviction by order dated 15.07.2024 in W.P. No. 29866 of 2023 between D. Babu vs. State of A.P. This Court holds that once the conviction is stayed, the guilt itself is stayed, and the guilt will not operate; hence, dismissal from service doesn’t arise. 7. In Ravikant S. Patil v. Sarvabhouma S. Bagali, (2007) 1 SCC 673 the Hon’ble Apex Court observed as under: “It deserves to be clarified that an order granting stay of conviction is not the rule but is an exception to be resorted to in rare cases depending upon the facts of a case. Where the execution of the sentence is stayed, the conviction continues to operate. But where the conviction itself is stayed, the effect is that the conviction will not be operative from the date of stay. An order of stay, of course, does not render the conviction non-existent, but only non-operative.” 8. A perusal of the proceedings impugned in the writ petition would reveal that the petitioner was dismissed from service given the conviction in C.C. No. 197 of 2014 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Cheepurupalli. The 3rd respondent failed to consider the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. R.C. No. 908 of 2024 whereby the conviction of A-1 imposed in C.C. No. 197 of 2014 was suspended. Hence, the proceedings impugned are liable to be set aside. 9. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the proceedings impugned vide C. No. 782/PR/Genl./2024, ROO No. 476/2024, dated 23.10.2024. The registry is directed to annex the copy of the order dated 15.07.2024 in W.P. No. 29888 of 2023. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.