APHC010177072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 9652/2025 Between: Mortha Sathish, ...PETITIONER AND The State of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAMANA ALLU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to declare the Impugned suspension-cum-Show cause Notice dated 05.11.2024 (copy received on 06.11.2024), vide Notice No. Rc.No.DVC/43/PE/Kirlampudi Mandal/17th Round/MGNREGS/2024 passed by the 3rd Respondent 2 CGR, J W.P. No.9652 of 2025 against the petitioner ignoring the ExplanationDt.12.11.2024 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 in order to continue the petitioner as Field Assistant in Veeravaram Village, KIrlampudi Mandal and to pass such other orders.” 2. Heard Sri Ramana Allu, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services – I appearing for 1st respondent, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel, appearing for respondents 2 to 4 and Sri G.Srinivasa Reddy, learned standing counsel, appearing for 5th respondent. 3. Petitioner while working as Field Assistant, based on certain allegations, was issued suspension-cum-show cause notice dated 05.11.2024. Petitioner submitted explanation refuting the said allegations on 12.11.2024. Grievance of petitioner is that despite lapse of more than four months, the enquiry is not completed and in accordance with Rule 6(2)(vi) of SRDS Rules, 2012 and Provision No.13B(5) of Circular No.666/EGS(P)/2012, dated 08.01.2013, the disciplinary enquiry 3 CGR, J W.P. No.9652 of 2025 ought to have been completed within thirty days, therefore, he is constrained to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel for respondents 2 to 4, on written instructions, submits that the enquiry is going on and that they would conclude the same within three weeks. 5. In view of aforesaid submissions, it would suffice to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 3rd respondent to complete the enquiry in pursuance to the impugned suspension-cum-show cause notice dated 05.11.2024, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from today by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner,. 6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _______________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J 23.04.2025 SS