APHC010323672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) j WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 16292 OF 2025 Between: P Venkateswarulu, S/o P. Koteswara Rao, Aged 47 years, Occ VRO, Petasanigundia, R/o D.No.2-162, Thota Bazar, Karempudi Village and Mandal, Palnadu District (Erstwhile Guntur District). ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector, Palnadu District at Palnadu. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gurazala, Palnadu District. 5. The Tahsildar, Karempudi, Palnadu 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in suspending the petitioner vide RC No.421/2025-A3 dated 06.06.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same lA 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 to direct the respondent to direct the 3'^'^ Respondent to continue the petitioner by suspending the order of the 3rd respondent vide RC No.421/2025-A3 dated 06.06.2025, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 5: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010323672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ■I [3506] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 16292/2025 Between: 1.P VENKATESWARULU, S/0 P. KOTESWARA RAO, AGED 47 YEARS, OCC VRO, PETASANIGUNDIA, R/0 D.N0.2- 162, THOTA BAZAR, KAREMPUDl VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT). ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS REVENUE DEPARTMENT, AMARAVATI, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT AT PALNADU. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GURAZALA, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5.THETAHSILDAR, KAREMPUDl, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of respondent in suspending the petitioner vide RC No.421/2025-A3 dated 06.06.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass such lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd 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 may be pleased to respondent to continue the petitioner by suspending the order of the respondent vide RC No.421/2025-A3 direct the 3rd dated 06.06.2025, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I ■S. 3 t The Court made the following order: Petitioner assails order of suspension in R.C.No.421/2025-A3 dated 06.06.2025 passed by the 2'^^ respondent. Petitioner IS a Village Revenue Officer of Petasanigundia Village, Karempudi Mandal, Palnadu ‘ District (Erstwhile Guntur District). Based allegations that petitioner and his family members in misuse of powers got mutated certain Government lands and acquired other lands. Initial notice dated 23.05.2025, was issued calling him to submit explanation, which is said to have been served on petitioner on 25.05.2025. While so, the Tahsildar also submitted preliminary report dated 26.05.2025, prima facie expressing that some of the lands were registered under the names of petitioner’s father, other family members and others which were classified as Government on Poramboke. Petitioner after receiving of notice submitted explanation 05.06.2025 setting out the details of acquisition of various properties by his family members along with the documentary evidence. However, the 3'^ respondent has passed impugned suspension order on 06.06.2025 placing petitioner under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings. now 2. Learned Senior counsel appearing for petitioner submits that, since the petitioner was issued notice, and that he submitted 4 a explanation on 05.06.2025 the respondents could not have issued impugned suspension orders without considering the same. Therefore, he would urge to consider and direct respondents to consider the explanation and review the suspension. Learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record the 3. written instructions dated 01.07.2024 stating that, as there is sufficient material against the petitioner, the competent authority has taken decision to invoke powers under Rule 8(1 )(a) of A.P.C.S.(CC&A) rules in placing petitioner under suspension. However, the said written instructions does not refute the aspect of the petitioner submitting explanation and the impugned suspension order being passed without considering the same. This Court is conscious of the fact that Rule 8(1 )(a) does not 4. require pre-enquiry. However, in the present case inasmuch as the petitioner has already issued notice on 23.05.2025, which came to be served on 28.05.2025, and that even before the Tahsildar has submitted preliminary report on 26.05.2025, without considering the petitioner’s explanation impugned suspension order could not have been passed. Therefore, without expressing anything on merits of the 5. matter, this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition 5 directing the respondent to consider the petitioner’s explanation dated 05.06.2025 and material placed along with it and review the order of suspension in R.C.No.421/2025-A3 dated 06.06.2025 and pass appropriate orders within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no 6. order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR i'fi //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Department, District. 2. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector, Palnadu District at Palnadu. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gurazala, Palnadu District. 5. The Tahsildar, Karempudi, Palnadu District. 6. One CC to SRI MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES I High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies gsg HIGH COURT DATED: 02/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 16292 OF 2025 andb^ •'S’ I IK JUL 2025 m . Current Section . DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS