APHC010172852025 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: 8955/2025 Between: M. Sambasivudu @ Sambasiva Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T S N SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2 CGR, J W.P.No.8955 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 order or directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents not considering the petitioner claim for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer without reference to the charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.94 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Vig.ll) Department dated 25.01.2024 and G.O.Rt.No.266 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Vig.ll) Department dated 05.03.2024 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration Department, dated 10.06.1999 as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discrimination and contrary to service rules apart from violation of article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the orders of this Hon'ble Court and consequentially direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Deputy Executive Engineer in terms G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration Department, dated 10.06.1999 with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard Sri T.S.N.Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondents. 3. The petitioner was issued charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.94 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.II) Department, dated 25.01.2024, alleging that he involved in certain irregularities in allotment of work orders during the period 2014-2015, which attracted the provisions of Rule 3(1) and 3(2) of APCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter ‘the Rules’). Similarly, yet another charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.266 Municipal Administration & Urban 3 CGR, J W.P.No.8955 of 2025 Development (Vig.II) Department dated 05.03.2024, was issued alleging that he involved in preparing estimates for certain amounts. However, recommended for release of higher amounts thereby causing loss to exchequer, which also leads of contravention of the Rules. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner submitted representation seeking for the documents, basing on which proposed charges were leveled, and in the process of submitting appropriate explanation. The petitioner presently working in the post of Assistant Engineer and is eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer. In view of pendency of aforesaid departmental proceedings, he is not being considered for promotion. He would urge that it would suffice, if the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I did not refute the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel, at the stage of admission, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for 4 CGR, J W.P.No.8955 of 2025 promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999, if the petitioner is in the zone of consideration and fulfills all requisite qualifications. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 07.04.2025 KBN