- (1.)Calling in question the legal propriety of the judgment and order dated 7.8.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P. No. 16102/2007 whereby the High Court has overturned the decision rendered by the A.P. State Administrative Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 2206/2007 vide order dated 19.04.2007, the present appeal has been preferred by special leave.
(2.)The facts lies in a narrow compass. The Respondent herein was charge-sheeted for offences punishable Under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') and eventually after trial was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of one year and payment of fine of Rs. 1000/- with a default clause. He assailed the conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No. 371/2007 and the High Court vide order dated 29.03.2007 in Crl. A.M.P. No. 497/2007 entertaining an application Under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code,') directed suspension of sentence and enlargement of bail on certain conditions. Be it noted, the High Court did not direct stay of the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial judge.
(3.)After the conviction the Department of Finance issued G.O. No. 91 dated 16.4.2007 dismissing the Respondent from service by invoking power under Rule 25 of A.P.C.S. (CC&A) Rules, 1991 (for short, 'the Rules'). The correctness of said order of dismissal was called in question before the Tribunal on the foundation that once there was an order Under Section 389(1) of the Code, the concerned Department could not have taken recourse to Rule 25(1) of the Rules to dismiss the Respondent from service. The Tribunal repelled the said submission of the Respondent and resultantly, dismissed the original application.