CHINTAKUNTA KANNAIAH v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/16230/2025 · 2025-07-03
Challa Gunaranjan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21851 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21851 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010307942025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 16230/2025 Between:
1. CHINTAKUNTA KANNAIAH, S/O RAMANJINI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O
1/255E, SULUVOY VILLAGE, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PR RD), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, VIJAYAWADA. 3) THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4)THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL.. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY,
KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL.. 5. THE ASST PROJECT DIRECTOR, ALUUR CLUSTER, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 7. THE ASST PROJECT OFFICER, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2 HCGR,J W.P.No.16230 of 2025
8. THE SULUVOY GRAM PANCHAYAT, SULAVOI VILLAGE, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. 9. SRI ALIVELI RANGASWAMY, S/O SRINIVASULU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. R/O 3-17, SULAVOI VILLAGE, HOLAGUNDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to DECLARE the action of the 4TH Respondent in issuing proceedings No.76/Memos/HRM/2017 dated 26.05.2025 suspending me from the service of Field Assistant of Suluvoy village without giving an opportunity of hearing, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, violative of principles of natural Justices besides violation of Rule-13 (B) (2) of Field Assistant Human Resource Policy in Circular No.666/EGS(P)/2012 dated 08.01.2013 and contrary to Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently SET- ASIDE the proceedings No.76/Memos/HRM/2017 dated 26.05.2025 issued by the 4TH Respondent in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to SUSPEND the operation of proceedings in No.76/Memos/HRM/2017 dated 26.05.2025 issued by the 4TH Respondent, in the interest of justice pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. J.V.PHANIDUTH Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
J.V.PHANIDUTH Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
3 HCGR,J W.P.No.16230 of 2025 The Court made the following Order:
Petitioner assails proceedings dated 26.05.2025, issued by 4th respondent, placing him under suspension as Field Assistant, pending inquiry. Petitioner has been appointed as Filed Assistant and based on certain allegations, he has now been placed under suspension by impugned proceedings. 2. Heard Sri J.V.Phaniduth, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 7. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Clause 13(B)(v) of the Field Assistant Human Resource Policy, the entire process of disciplinary proceedings have to be concluded within thirty (30) days. Despite, petitioner being suspended on 26.05.2025, as of now, the proceedings has not commenced nor any show cause notice has been issued. Therefore, he urged to set aside the impugned suspension order. 4. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, submits that respondents are about to issue show cause notice in a day or two and that the inquiry would be concluded in terms of the policy. 4 HCGR,J W.P.No.16230 of 2025
5. In view of aforesaid submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by directing the 4th respondent to conclude the inquiry within a period of thirty (30) days from today, after providing due opportunity of hearing to petitioner, and pass appropriate speaking orders, strictly in accordance with law. Till such exercise is completed, respondents shall not make any permanent arrangement to the subject post. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN
Date: 04.07.2025 KBN