::1:: APHC010456392024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 23939/2024 Between: 1. SEEGIPALLI NARAYANA, S/O LATE NARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT 8-90, GORAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, PARIGI MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 515212 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH, MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DY DISTRICT MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER, DHARAMAVARAM, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, PARIGI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. M RAGHAVENDRA NAIDU, , MULTI- PURPOSE HEALTH ::2:: ASSISTANT(M), PHC PARIGI,SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER DMHO, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, ANANTHAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH - 515 001. R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER DT.17.02.2026 IN I.A.NO.01 OF 2026. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent no. 3, in completing the enquiry against the 5th respondent despite the 2nd respondent directed to complete the enquiry immediately vide its proceedings no Rc No 82/E2/2024 dated 23.05.2024 within timeline stipulated in G.O.Ms. No. 91 dated 12.09.2022 is as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 15,19,21, 300-A of the constitution of India consequently direct the respondent no 3 to expediate the enquiry against the 5th respondent strictly in accordance with law and rules in vogue and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW ::3:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.23939 of 2024 This Court made the following ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent initiated disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent No.5 pursuant to the complaint made by the petitioner on 06.05.2024. An enquiry officer was appointed vide proceedings dated 23.05.2024. While appointing enquiry officer the 2nd Respondent directed the enquiry officer to conduct a detailed enquiry regarding the allegations made against the 5th Respondent herein and submit a report immediately for taking necessary action. The further case of the petitioner is that even after lapse of two years the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Respondent No.5 are not finalized and still no report has been submitted as directed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per G.O.Ms.No.91, dated 12.09.2022 any enquiry or disciplinary proceedings initiated against any Government Employee, the same should be completed within a period of three months in ordinary ::4:: complaints and if it is a major punishment or major penalty the enquiry should be completed within six months. But in the instant case nearly two years period already lapsed without completing the enquiry and finalising the disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent No.5. Hence the writ petition. 3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submitted written instructions dated 21.04.2026, wherein it is stated that the enquiry officer completed detailed enquiry and submitted report on 14.08.2024. But the 2nd Respondent who is competent authority for issuing proceedings and completing disciplinary proceedings against the 5th Respondent did not finalize but it is stated in written instructions dated 21.04.2026 that it will be completed now without any delay. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Medical and Health and perused the material placed on record. 5. In Dwarapureddy Sudhakara Rao Vs. The State of AP and Ors1 this Hon’ble Court held as under: “20. He further submits that the respondent No. 1 issued G.O's and Circulars more recent G.O.Ms. No. 679, dated 01.11.2008, wherein it is contemplated that any disciplinary enquiry should be completed within a period of three months. But if the proceedings are complicated one, it must be within a period of six months, but dehorsing the batch of G.O's and Circulars issued by the 1 2023:APHC :20142 ::5:: respondent No. 1, the disciplinary authority did not complete proceedings even after lapse of 14 years and even today by way of it's counter-affidavit urging that to get the approval from the respondent No. 1 as well as APPSC for proposal, punishment is nothing but in utter violation of Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, 1965 as well as G.O's issued by the respondent No. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in W.P. Nos. 11776 and 11779 of 2021, wherein, it is held as follows: "This Court finds what is argued by Sri M.Vijay Kumar is correct. Delay is clear and is writ large. The case law cited by the learned counsel is also applicable. In P.V.Mahadevan's case (2 supra), there was a delay of 10 years in initiating the action. Relying upon other cases which are referred, the Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly held as follows: 11. Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that allowing the respondent to proceed further with the departmental proceedings at this distance of time will be very prejudicial to the appellant. Keeping a higher government official under charges of corruption and disputed integrity would cause unbearable mental agony and distress to the officer concerned. The protracted disciplinary enquiry against a government employee should, therefore, be avoided not only in the interests of the government employee but in public interest and also in the interests of inspiring confidence in the minds of the government employees. At this stage, it is necessary to draw the curtain and to put an end to the enquiry. The appellant had already suffered enough and more on account of the disciplinary proceedings. As a matter of fact, the mental agony and sufferings of the appellant due to the protracted disciplinary proceedings would be much more than the punishment. For the mistakes committed by the department in the procedure for initiating the disciplinary proceedings, the appellant should not be made to suffer. As argued by the learned Government Pleader, the petitioners cannot take advantage of the non-functioning of a Tribunal at this stage. However, the fact remains that in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 679, the case should have finished in a time bound manner. Even otherwise, a series of orders quashing proceedings have been passed by the learned single Judges from September, 2020 onwards till date. Despite the orders being passed and the proceedings being quashed, as a consequence of the order, the respondents have not taken any steps to ensure that the ::6:: disciplinary proceedings are started also. In the opinion of this Court; this gross inaction on the part of the State' is enough to put an end to the mental agony of the petitioners. Principles of comity urge this Court to follow the earlier orders passed by the learned single Judges." 6. In view of submission made by both the counsel and on perusal of the written instructions submitted by learned Government Pleader dated 21.04.2026 as well as ratio laid down by this Hon’ble Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court as extracted above, this Court is of considered opinion that this Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd Respondent herein to complete the enquiry and disciplinary proceedings pursuant to the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer dated 14.08.2024 and pass appropriate order within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. _________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J DT: 21.04.2026 krk ::7:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA W.P.No.23939 of 2024 DT: 21.04.2026 krk 53