ORDER : 1. 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 respondent No.3 in not promoting the Petitioner as School Assistant (Telugu) in Karimnagar District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to promote the Petitioner as School Assistant (Telugu) by posting her as per the web options exercised in Karimnagar District on par with selected candidates for promotion by web couselling to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) in Karimnagar District vide Rc.No.735/E3/2023/A1/A2-2, dated 18.06.2024 & 28.07.2024 and to pass…” 2. Heard Sri V. Narasimha Goud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was working as a Language Pandit (Telugu) in Karimnagar District, a seniority list of all eligible candidates for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) in Karimnagar District was prepared by respondent No.3, wherein, the petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.21 among the (115) candidates. Thereafter, pursuant to the same, the petitioner appeared for web counseling on 15.06.2024, wherein, her eligibility for promotion was shown as ‘yes’ and also successfully completed the process of certificate verification vide Emp.ID.No.1504569. Despite the same, while respondent No.3 issued proceedings in Rc.No.735/E2/2023/A1/ A2- 2 dated 18.06.2024, effecting temporary promotions to the post of School Assistants, including the juniors of the petitioner, her name was not reflected in the said list. Therefore, the petitioner submitted her representation to the authorities on 19.06.2024. However, no action has been taken thereon. 4. It is further submitted that the office of the District Education Officer has informed the petitioner to assume duties as Language Pandit in the same place, i.e. Z.P.H.S., Gattududdenapalli, Karimnagar District, until further orders. Subsequently, after participating in the web counseling for transfers, she was posted at M.P.U.P.S., Irigapur, Shankarapatnam Mandal. However, her applications dated 19.06.2024 and 21.06.2024, for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) remain pending before respondent No.3. While so, one Mr. Paka Ashok, who was shown at Sl.No.115 in the seniority list, was promoted as School Assistant. Subsequently, after participating in the web counseling for transfers, she was posted at M.P.U.P.S., Irigapur, Shankarapatnam Mandal. However, her applications dated 19.06.2024 and 21.06.2024, for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) remain pending before respondent No.3. While so, one Mr. Paka Ashok, who was shown at Sl.No.115 in the seniority list, was promoted as School Assistant. Thus, the action of the respondents in promoting her juniors, while denying the petitioner’s rightful promotion, in spite of undergoing web counseling and certificate verification, is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. 5. It is further submitted that the petitioner and her husband were earlier charged in a private criminal case for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE vide C.C.No.275 of 2015. However, the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise), Karimnagar acquitted them vide order dated 03.12.2018, holding the petitioner and her husband are not guilty of the criminal charges. Thereafter, the de facto complainant filed a criminal appeal against the said order vide Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2020 on the file of the learned Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, wherein, the petitioner and her husband were convicted vide judgment dated 22.08.2022. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner and her husband filed an appeal before this Court vide Crl.A.No.450 of 2022, wherein, this Court, vide order dated 19.09.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022, enlarged them on bail, on their executing personal bonds for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of learned Judge, Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar. Accordingly, they were released on bail. 6. It is further submitted that while the things stood thus, respondent No.3 issued proceedings dated 14.10.2022, suspending the petitioner from service for her involvement in the aforesaid criminal case and for brief detention in custody from 13.09.2022 to 19.09.2022. Thereafter, a charge memo dated 19.10.2022 was issued, for which, she submitted her written statement of defense on 21.10.2022, and requested reinstatement. Thereafter, on 21.11.2022, respondent No.3 issued the proceedings, reinstating the petitioner into service and posting her to the same place prior to her detention, i.e. Z.P.H.S., Gattududdenapalli, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, pending enquiry. It is further submitted that the criminal case does not relate to the official duties of the petitioner. Thereafter, on 21.11.2022, respondent No.3 issued the proceedings, reinstating the petitioner into service and posting her to the same place prior to her detention, i.e. Z.P.H.S., Gattududdenapalli, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, pending enquiry. It is further submitted that the criminal case does not relate to the official duties of the petitioner. Hence, denying promotion to the petitioner, who was shown at Sl.No.21 in the seniority list, while promoting her juniors, including Mr. Paka Ashok, who was shown at Sl.No.115, is not only illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, but also tantamount to discrimination. Therefore, learned counsel seeks indulgence of this Court to issue necessary directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) on par with the candidates promoted vide proceedings dated 18.06.2024 and 28.07.2024. Reliance has been placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others vs. A. Rajeswara Reddy , 2010 (3) ALD 501 . 7. On 04.08.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2025, stating that respondent No.3 has issued a publication dated 02.08.2025, informing that the vacancies available in the post of School Assistant in Karimnagar will be filled in by all the eligible candidates, and a provisional vacancy list of School Assistants (Telugu) was also notified, showing (11) vacancies exclusively meant for the Secondary Grade Teachers, which is equivalent to the post of Language Pandit. Therefore, since all the seniors and juniors of the petitioner were given promotion, she is the only eligible candidate fit for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu). Therefore, learned counsel once again prays this Court to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of School Assistant in any of the (11) available vacancies, without reference to the pendency of disciplinary proceedings vide charge sheet dated 19.10.2022, which is the subject matter of Crl.A.No.450 of 2022, pending on the file of this Court. 8. 8. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, while admitting that the petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.21 in the seniority list, submits that all the eligible candidates were issued with promotion orders, except the petitioner herein, due to the criminal charges registered against her for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . Though she was initially acquitted in the criminal case vide order dated 03.12.2018 in C.C.No.275 of 2015, passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise) at Karimnagar, in the appeal preferred by the de facto complainant vide Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2020, the learned Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, found the petitioner guilty of the charges and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment. As such, she was detained in custody from 13.09.2022 to 19.09.2022. However, this Court, vide order dated 19.09.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.450 of 2022, enlarged the petitioner on bail. The said criminal appeal is pending before this Court. 9. It is further submitted that the petitioner was initially placed under suspension on 14.10.2022, on account of her involvement in criminal case and detention in custody for more than (48) hours. Thereafter, on considering her representation, she was reinstated into service and was posted to Z.P.H.S., Gattududdenapalli, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, pending initiation of disciplinary proceedings and the final outcome of Crl.A.No.450 of 2022, pending before this Court. Thereafter, on 19.10.2022, a Charge Memo was also issued against the petitioner, in terms of Rule 20 of the Telangana Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 and further action is still pending. Therefore, though the petitioner was initially permitted to participate in the promotion counseling as per her seniority, on account of pendency of disciplinary and criminal proceedings, she is not entitled for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu). Hence, her promotion orders are rightly deferred. As such, it is prayed to dismiss the present writ petition. Reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in A. Jalender Reddy vs. State of Telangana and Another , 2017 (4) ALD 538 . 10. This Court has taken note of the rival submissions made by the respective parties. 11. Hence, her promotion orders are rightly deferred. As such, it is prayed to dismiss the present writ petition. Reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in A. Jalender Reddy vs. State of Telangana and Another , 2017 (4) ALD 538 . 10. This Court has taken note of the rival submissions made by the respective parties. 11. A perusal of the record discloses that the petitioner was implicated in a criminal case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , vide C.C.No.275 of 2015, wherein, the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise), Karimnagar, vide order dated 03.12.2018, acquitted her, holding her not guilty of the said charges. However, in the appeal preferred by the de facto complainant vide Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2020, the learnd Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 22.08.2022, convicted the petitioner of the offense punishable under Section 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year, in addition to payment of a fine of Rs.10,000/-. Thereafter, she was detained in judicial custody from 13.09.2022 to 19.09.2022, on which date, she was enlarged on bail, vide order passed by this Court dated 19.09.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.450 of 2022. As a result of her detention in judicial custody for more than (48) hours, she was placed under suspension on 15.10.2022, which was later revoked on 21.11.2022, reinstating her into service and posting her to Z.P.H.S., Gattududdenapalli, Mandakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District. In the meantime, she was issued with a Charge Memo vide proceedings Rc.No.3040/A1/2022 dated 19.10.2022. 12. Now, the issue before this Court is with regard to the petitioner’s entitlement for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu). 13. Admittedly, the petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.21 in the seniority list of Language Pandits (Telugu) issued by respondent No.3 herein. Thereafter, on the basis of the said seniority list, respondent No.3 issued proceedings Rc.No.735/E2/2023/A1/A2-2 dated 18.06.2024 and 28.07.2024, effecting promotions of as many as (121)+(32) candidates. As can be seen from the list annexed to the said proceedings, the candidates who were originally shown at Sl.Nos.20 and 22 in the seniority list, i.e., immediate senior and junior to the petitioner, were promoted as School Assistants (Telugu). As can be seen from the list annexed to the said proceedings, the candidates who were originally shown at Sl.Nos.20 and 22 in the seniority list, i.e., immediate senior and junior to the petitioner, were promoted as School Assistants (Telugu). However, the respondents have deferred the case of the petitioner for promotion, citing the pendency of disciplinary and criminal proceedings. 14. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that the disciplinary proceedings, initiated against the petitioner in the year 2022, vide Charge Memo dated 19.10.2022 issued by respondent No.3, are still pending. 15. In A. Jalender Reddy (supra), this Court emphasized that prolonged delay in disciplinary proceedings, without any justification, cannot deny promotion to the candidates, if such delay is not attributable to the employee. The relevant portion of the said decision is extracted hereunder: “127. As seen from the facts in WP No.1045 of 2017, the incident relates to the year 2011 and on 29.9.2014, the Government declined the request of the ACB to sanction to prosecute the petitioner and instead, decided to entrust the cse to the Commissioner of Inquiries. For more than two years, there is no progress in formulating the charges and the disciplinary proceedings are lingering at that stage. On the ground that disciplinary proceedings are pending, his juniors were promoted in November, 2016. Similarly in WP No.2451 of 2017, the incident relates to the year 2014 and the crime was registered on 12.6.2014. On 23.4.2016, the Government decided to initiate disciplinary action. Thereafter, there is no further progress. Having decided to initiate disciplinary action, there is no justification for the Government to keep silent, not to frame the charges and conduct enquiry. Thus, in the facts of these two cases and by applying the balancing process, I deem it proper to direct the respondents to conclude the disciplinary action as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A time schedule to be drawn commensurate with the procedure incorporated in APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991. Petitioners shall cooperate for early conclusion of the enquiry. If the petitioners do no cooperate, it is open to the disciplinary authorities to conduct ex parte enquiry and conclude the proceedings. Their entitlement for promotion shall be reviewed on conclusion of disciplinary proceedings. A time schedule to be drawn commensurate with the procedure incorporated in APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991. Petitioners shall cooperate for early conclusion of the enquiry. If the petitioners do no cooperate, it is open to the disciplinary authorities to conduct ex parte enquiry and conclude the proceedings. Their entitlement for promotion shall be reviewed on conclusion of disciplinary proceedings. For any reason, disciplinary proceedings are not concluded, delay not attributable to the petitioners, their entitlement for promotion may be considered in accordance with G.O. Ms. No.257 dated 10.6.1999. Subject to above directions, WP Nos. 1045 and 2451 of 2017 are dismissed.” 16. Admittedly, in the present case, though the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner in the year 2022, there is no progress in the matter for almost three years. This prolonged delay is clearly attributable to the administrative lapses but not to the petitioner. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner, having been shown as eligible for promotion and also having undergone promotion counseling and certificate verification, cannot be denied the benefit of promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu), solely due to the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings. 17. In the foregoing discussion, this Court deems it fit and proper to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) strictly in accordance with the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999, as against the existing vacancies, as and when promotions are effected. 18. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No costs.