APHC010160312025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8267/2025 Between: Ehsan Basha ...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 I The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer in RWS and SD Department, on mere pendency of G. O. Rt. No.127 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.VI) Department, dated 05.03.2025 (incident pertaining to the year 2017) issued by 1st respondent, denial of promotion, as 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 2 CGR, J. W.P.No.8267 of 2025 post of Chief Engineer in the ensuing counsel without reference to the Charge Memo vide G.O.Rt. No. 127 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.VI) Department, dated 05.03.2025, by duly extending the similar order passed in W.P. No.6397 of 2025, dated 13.03.2025, and to pass…” 2. Petitioner presently working as Superintending Engineer and he is due for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer in R.W.S. and S.G. Department. Based on vigilance and enquiry report, on allegations of irregularities noticed in execution of C.P.W.S. Scheme to Singanamala Constituency of Ananthapuramu District, during the period 2017, petitioner has been issued charge memo vide G.O.Rt. No.127, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Vig.VI) Department, dated 05.03.2025. Petitioner submitted explanation to the same on 15.03.2025 and the enquiry is pending. For the incident happened in the year 2017, petitioner has been issued charge memo in the month of March, 2025 with inordinate delay. Petitioner is within the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, which are likely to be held soon. The 1st respondent seems to have issued G.O.Rt.No.451 General Administration (DPC) Department, dated 04.03.2025, constituting Members for Screening Committee for departmental promotions and as process is set in, in view of pendency of aforesaid departmental proceedings, petitioner apprehends that his case may not consider for promotion. 3 CGR, J. W.P.No.8267 of 2025 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is within the zone of consideration for promotion as Chief Engineer and due to pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, there is every possibility of petitioner being denied of such promotion. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I 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 present case, though charge memo has been issued on 05.03.2025, the same relates back to the incident, which has occurred in the year 2017, and on-going disciplinary proceedings came to be initiated only after vigilance and enquiry has pointed certain irregularities, for such inordinate delay in initiating enquiry, 4 CGR, J. W.P.No.8267 of 2025 petitioner cannot be denied his right for considering promotion to next higher post. 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both the 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. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:04.04.2025. cs