IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVA (Special Original Jurisdiction) to -o' THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH ffa f ® £l 35 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6397 OF 2025 Between: K Durga Lakshmi, D/o K. Chandra Rao, Aged 42 years, Working as A.E.E (R and B), O/o. Engineer in Chief, MDR Wing, Vijayawada R/o. H. No. 59A/17/5/4, RTC Colony, Vijayawada. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, TR Department, A.P. Secretariat Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (R and B) (Admn) Department, State HODs Offices Building, MG Road Krishna District. and B Road and Buildings Vijayawada, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declare the action of the respondent in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in R and B Department, on mere pendency of Charge Memo vide G.O. Transport Roads and Buildings (VIG. R & B) Department (incident pertaining to the year 2009 to 2013) issued by 1®‘ respondent, denial of promotion is Rt. No. 406 dt. 22.12.2022 illegal, arbitrary whimsical and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary consequently direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in the ensuing counsel without reference to the Charge Memo vide G.O. Rt. No. 406 Transport Roads and Buildings (VIG. R and B) Department dt. 22.12.2022, in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 257 dated 10-06-1999, on the same anology of similar directions of this Hon'ble Court passed in W.P. No. 25098 Of 2024, which were granted by duly following the reported judgment of the Division Bench Govt of A.P rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department Vs. A. Rajeswara Reddy and G.O.Ms.No. 679, dated. 1-11-2008. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in R & B Department, in the existing vacancy, without reference to the pending Charge Memo vide G.O. Rt. No. 406 Transport Roads & Buildings (VIG. R&B) Department dt. 22.12.2022 issued by the respondents and in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 257 dated 10-06-1999 pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner.SRI. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 & 2: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010124542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY. THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6397/2025 Between: K Durga Lakshmi ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES II 2 HCGR.J W.P.No.6397 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s;- “...to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one In the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer In R & B Department, on mere pendency of Charge Memo vide G.O.Rt.No.406 Transport, Roads & Buildings (VIG. R & B) Department dated 22.12.2022 (incident pertaining to the year 2009 to 2013) issued by 1^^ respondent, denial of promotion is illegal, arbitrary, whimsical and In violation of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary, consequently direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in the ensuing counsel without reference to the Charge Memo vide G.C.Rt.No.406 Transport, Roads & Buildings (VIG. R & B) Department dated 22.12.2022 in terms of G.D.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 on the same analogy of similar directions of this Hon’ble Court passed In W.P.No.25098 of 2024, which were granted by duly following the reported judgment of the Division Bench Govt, of A.P. rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department Vs. A.Rajeswara Reddy and G.D.Ms.No.679, dated 1.11.2008 and to pass such other order or orders....” 2. Heard Sri Bugulu Sreeteja, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Service-ll appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. The petitioner is presently working as Assistant Executive Engineer in Roads & Buildings Department. Charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.406, dated 22.12.2022 was issued against the petitioner alleging that she facilitated illegal mining along with other officers. HCGRJ -X 1 W.P.No. 6397 of 2025 Refuting the said allegations, the petitioner submitted an explanation on 08.02.2023 and the enquiry is pending. Even before the issuance of charge memo, the 2 nd respondent, by proceedings dated 13.02.2021, recommended to drop the charges against all the officers, as they were not involved in the illegal quarrying. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is within the zone of consideration for promotion as Deputy Executive Engineer and due to pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, there is every possibility of petitioner being denied of such promotion. 4. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-ll would submit that the respondent authorities will consider the case of the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 6. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 01.11.2008, and thereafter G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022, fixing timelines to conclude the inquiry within three months in case of simple and six months in case of complicated. In the case at hand, the respondent authorities flouted the timelines fixed in the G.Os. For the fault on the part of the disciplinary authority, the petitioner shall not be penalized. 4 HCGR.J W.P.No.6397 of 2025 the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent of learned counsel, directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion, if the petitioner is in the zone of consideration, without reference to the aforementioned charge memo. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar Given 7. both the stand closed. /rrRUE copy;/ SECTION OFFICER State of Andhra To, TR and B Department, 1. The Principal Secretary Pradesh. A.P. Secretariat Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (R 3*^^ {Admn) Department, State Krishna District. 3. One CC to SRI. 4. Two CCS to [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Road and Buildings MG Road, Vijayawada hods Offices Building BUGULU SREETEJA, Advocate [OPUC] Court Of Andhra Pradesh. GP FOR SERVICES II, High PRK HIGH COURT DATED:13/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.6397 of 2025 2 S MAR 2025 | ^ . Current Section o DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS