IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) A, •y. ^ * THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ■7 X y ^1. >s./ PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJA WRIT PETITION NO: 10530 OF 2025 Between: B. Gopalakrishna Murthy, S/o. B.Pullaiah, aged about 56 years, Deputy Executive Engineer, Kurnool Urban Development Authority, Kurnool. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, MA & UD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health, Andhra Pradesh, Tadepally Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, to declare the action of the 1®* Respondent in continuing the disciplinary proceedings issued in G.O.Rt.No.789, MA & UD (Vig.lll) Dept., dated 20-10-2022 is totally illegal, arbitrary, irreational and void being contrary to the orders Government for conclusion of disciplinary proceedings for stipulted time in G.O.Ms.No.679, dated 01-11-2008 and well as G.O.Ms.NO.91, dated 12-09-2022 and set aside the same and consequently direct respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion as Executive Engineer with all consequential benefits otherwise the petitioner will be put to heavy and irreparable loss. as as lA No: 1 OF 202S Petition under Section 151 CPC 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 case of the Petitioner for promotion as Executive Engineer without reference to charge memo issued by the 1®' Respondent bearing G.O.Rt.NO.789, MA & UD (Vig.lll) Dept., dated 20-10-2022 and promote him as such on the anagoly of orders issued in the similar circumstances by this Hon'ble Court pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R. RAJASEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: ASST.GP FOR SERVICES-I The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010206302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ■ I v [3506] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO; 10530/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER B Gopalakrishna Murthy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RANGARAJULA RAJASEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES 2 HCGR, J W.P.No.l0530of2025 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 particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the 1®' Respondent in continuing the disciplinary proceedings issued in G.O.Rt.No.789, MA and UD (Vig.lll) Dept., dated 20-10-2022 is totally illegal, arbitrary, irrational and void being contrary to the orders of the Government for conclusion of disciplinary proceedings for stipulated time in G.O.Ms.No.679, dated 01-11-2008 and as well as G.O.Ms.No.91, dated 12-09-2022 and set aside the and consequently direct respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion as Executive Engineer with all consequential benefits, as otherwise the petitioner will be put to heavy and irreparable loss and to pass such other order or orders... ” Heard Sri R.Rajasekhar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondents. same 2. 3. Petitioner, while working as Deputy Executive Engineer, alleged to have been indulged in certain irregularities constituting misconduct, was issued charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.789, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.lll) Department, dated 20.10.2022, setting out sole Article of Charge. Petitioner after submitting explanation. Inquiry Officer has submitted report holding that charge leveled against the petitioner was not proved and similar charges were framed against co-employees, even with so as 3 HCGR, J W.P.No.l0530of 2025 respect to them the report found that the charges were not proved. However, the Government vide Memo No.470739A/ig.111/2021, dated 12.03.2025, has disagreed with the aforesaid report and proposed to proceed with disciplinary proceedings and the factors of disagreement were communicated to the petitioner for submitting explanation. Petitioner is in the process of submitting explanation to the same. In view of pendency of these departmental proceedings, petitioner is not being considered for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of 4. pendency of ongoing departmental proceedings, which otherwise ought to have been completed in three months in simple cases and in complicated cases within six months, as per the timeframe fixed in G.O.Ms.No.679, General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008, and in G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Service.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022, and in view of inordinate delay, petitioner is deprived for promotion. Besides, he also contended that co-charged officers namely Sri Ch. Obulesu and Sri B.Venugopal, were promoted as Executive Engineer on ad-hoc G.O.Ms.NO.21, Municipal Administration & Urban basis vide dated 03.02.2023, and Department, Development (A) 4 HCGR, J W.P.No.l0530of2025 G.O.Rt.No.313, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (C1) Department, dated 16.04.2025, petitioner also claims parity with them, as otherwise the same amounts to discrimination. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for 5. respondents does not refute the aspect that co-charged officers were granted ad-hoc promotions, as Executive Engineer. However he contends that the ongoing inquiry will be completed within reasonable time, in terms of timelines prescribed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.679, General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008, and in G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Service.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022. Having considered the fact that, in the present case, though 6. the charge memo was issued way back on 20.10.2022, timelines have not been adhered to. For no fault of the petitioner, he cannot be deprived of consideration for promotion, if he is otherwise eligible. That apart when co-charged officers were granted ad-hoc promotions, petitioner also would be entitled to be considered same benefit. In view of the above observations, the respondents are 7. directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer, without reference to disciplinary 5 HCGR, J W.P.No.l0530of2025 proceedings in pursuance of charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.789 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.lll) Department dated 20.10.2022. It is further directed that the respondents shall complete the pending inquiry within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE6t%n OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, MA & UD Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health, Andhra Pradesh, Tadepally, Guntur District. 3. One CC to Sri R. Rajasekhara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Services-I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies. gi # HIGH COURT gi DATED:24/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.10530 of 2025 g 2 8 APR 20?*; - Curreni Section DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS