APHC010164562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8878/2025 Between: Karri Govinda Rao ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAMANA ALLU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2 CGR, J W.P.No.8878 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularity one in the nature Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, declaring the Impugned suspension cum Show cause Notice Dt. nil.11.2024(copy received on 04.11.2024), vide Rc.No.DVC/43/PE/Kirlampudi Mandal/17th round/MGNREGS/2024 passed by the 3rd Respondent is illegal, unjust and violation of the article 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and set aside the same in pursuance of SRDS Rules, 2012 as well provisions of the Field Assistants Human Resource Policy (FAHRP) under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme by directing the 3RD Respondent to consider the Reply/Explanation Dt. 11.11.2024 in order to continue the petitioner as Field Assistant in Palem village of Kirlampudi Mandal and to pass such other order or orders…” 2. The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant at Palem Village, Kirlampudi Mandal. On certain allegations, he was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 04.11.2024, and was also called upon to submit explanation. The petitioner submitted explanation on 11.11.2024 refuting the said allegations. Despite submitting the same, the 3rd respondent has not concluded the enquiry and on the pretext of enquiry, he has been illegally placed under suspension and the grievance of the petitioner is so far not redressed. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 3 CGR, J W.P.No.8878 of 2025 3. Heard Sri Ramana Allu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent No.1, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, Ms P.Revathi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Sri G.Srinivasula Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.5. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of Rule 6(2)(vi) of SRDS Rules 2012 and Clause 13B(5) of Circular No.666/EGS(P)/2012, dated 08.01.2023 (FAHRP), enquiry ought to have been completed within thirty days. However, there is an inordinate delay in finalizing the same. Therefore, he urged this Court to direct the 3rd respondent to complete the enquiry forthwith. 5. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 on instructions submits that enquiry before the 3rd respondent would be completed soon after issuing notice and hearing the petitioner. 6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 3rd respondent to complete enquiry within a period of thirty (30) days from today, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law and per SRDS Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 CGR, J W.P.No.8878 of 2025 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 07.04.2025 KBN