IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT C> THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI^^^^ WRIT PETITION NO: 924 OF 202fi AMARAVATI A: -o 73 iO m: Between: Mattada Veeranna Raju, S/o. Daniel, Age 44 Range Officer Nuziveedu, (Socio Forestry), Office of the Officer, (Socio Forestry), Office of the D.F.O. Eluru District. years. Working as Deputy Forest Range (Socio Forestry), Nuziveedu, ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forests, Science and Technology Department Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Forest Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh. Force) 3. The Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle, Rajahmundry. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction may more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders passed by the 2"'* Respondent in Proceedings No.3514/2016/ A and DC3(xvi), 13-2-2023, imposing the penaity of Stoppage of One Increment Cumulative Effect besides of the 1st Respondent in of filing an Appeal dated 5-6-2023 months is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles dated With recovery of loss of Rs. 1,27,638/- and the action not interfering with the impugned orders, in spite even after a lapse of one year six 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law declared by the Honble Supreme Court of India reported in 2006 (5) SCC 88 (Bijaiani case), 1998 (4) SCC 154 (RadhaKrishnan s case) and 2005 (6) SCC 636 (Mahadevans case) and contrary to the Circular Memos., issued by the Government i e Memo.No.35676/Ser.C/98-1 G.A.(Ser.C) Department, dated 1-7-1998 and Circular Memo.No.24637/Ser.C/2000-2 G.A.(Ser.C) Department, dated 5- 9-2000, and not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially declare that the petitioner is entitled without any punishment. said punishments are iliegal and arbitrary and that the for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer lA NO: 1 OF 2091^ 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 pieased to issue an interim direction, suspending the operation of the orders passed by the 3514/2016/A&DC3(xvi) dated 13-2-2023 Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 9n9fi 2nd Respondent Proceedings No. pending disposal of the Writ in Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i pleased to issue praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be an interim direction, directing the Respondents consider the case of the petitioner for to promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer without reference to the impugned punishment orders Respondent in Proceedings No.3514/2016/A nd passed by the 2 DC3(xvi) dated 13-2-2023 pending disposal of the Writ and Petition. / Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.KISHORE KUMAR representing SRI P. V. RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:SRI S. RAJU, AGP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER W.P.No.924 of 2025 APHC010002142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 924/20?/^ [3331] JANUARY Between: 1.MATTADA VEERANNA RAJU, S/0. DANIEL, AGE 44 YEARS, WORKING AS DEPUTY RANGE OFFICER NUZIVEEDU, (SOCIO FORESTRY), OFFICE OF THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, (SOCIO FORESTRY), OFFICE OF THE D.F.O., (SOCIO FORESTRY) NUZIVEEDU, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. ENVIRONMENT, FORESTS, DEPARTMENT ANDHRA PRADESH, VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, FOREST FORCE), MANGALAGIRI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, RAJAHMUNDRY RAJAHMUNDRY. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AMARAVATI, (HEAD OF CIRCLE, ...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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in Proceedings No.3514/2016/ A and DC3(xvi), dated 13-2-2023 T SRSJ W.P.No.924of 2025 imposing the penalty of Stoppage of One Increment With Cumulative Effect besides recovery of loss of Rs. 1,27,638/- and the action of the 1st Respondent in not interfering with the impugned orders, in spite of filing an Appeal dated 5-6-2023, even after a lapse of one year six months is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law declared by the Honble Supreme Court of India reported in 2006 (5) see 88 (Bijalani case), 1998 (4) SCC 154 (RadhaKrishnan s case) and 2005 (6) SCC 636 (Mahadevans case) and contrary to the Circular Memo.No.35676/Ser.C/98-1 Circular Government i.e dated 1-7-1998 and Memos., issued by the G.A.(Ser.C) Department Memo.No.24637/Ser.C/2000-2 G.A.(Ser.C) Department, dated 5-9-2000, and not considering the case of the petitioner f- for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer is iiiegai, arbitrary and vioiative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the consequentially declare that the said punishments Constitution of India and illegal and arbitrary and that the petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer, without any punishment and to pass are 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 pleased to issue an interim direction, suspending the operation of the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in Proceedings No. 3514/2016/A&DC3( xvi) dated 13-2-2023, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass lA NO: 2 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 interim direction, directing the Respondents to consider pleased to issue an the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer without reference to the impugned punishment orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in Proceedings No.3514/2016/A and DC3(xvi) dated 13-2-2023 pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V RAM AN A Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I SRS,J W.P.No.924 of 2025 The Court made the following; ■ORDER: vide respondent No.2 passed dated 13.02.2023, imposing penalty of effect besides recovery of the order of Impugning Proc.No.3514/2016/A & DC3 (xvi) “stoppage of one increment with cumulative Government loss Rs.1,27,638;-” and the action of respondent No.1 in not interfering with the impugned order despite filing the appeal on 05.06.2023, the petitioner, Deputy Range Officer, Nuziveedu (Socio Forestry), filed the above writ petition. of the D.F.O., F.S.D. and issued Articles of Charges vide 2. Respondent No.3, based on the reports Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry 22.11.2016 (Ex.P1) to the petitioner, for which the 30.03.2017. Thereafter, the authority, vide the . The Rc.No.5571/2016/M8 dated petitioner submitted reply dated proceedings impugned imposed the punishment indicated supra petitioner immediately filed the appeal before respondent No.1 on 05.06.2023 (EX.P3). However, the appeal is not disposed of so penalty imposed, the writ petition is filed. far. Hence, impugning the Heard Sri A. Kishore Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri P.V. learned counsel for the petitioner 3. and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Ramana Government Pleader for Services, for the respondents. would submit that non-disposal of the Learned counsel for the petitioner appeal by the appellate authority is hampering the petitioner's promotional chances. 4. Pleader for Services, on the other hand will dispose of the appeal filed by the Learned Assistant Government would submit that respondent No.1 petitioner (Ex.P5), as per the rules within six weeks 5. from the material available on record, there is no dispute vide EX.P4 and filing of Thus, as seen regarding the penalty imposed against the petitioner 6. V SRSJ W.P.No.924 of 2025 appeal by the petitioner on 05.06.2023 vide Ex.P5. However, the appeal was forwarded to respondent No.1 through proper channel on 31.10.2023. Respondent No.1, for the reasons best known, did not dispose of the appeal for one and half years. 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that failure of respondent No.1 in not disposing of the appeal, is hampering the petitioner’s promotional chances, this writ petition is disposed of at the admissions stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side directing the learned respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal, strictly as per the rules, within six weeks from today. 8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader shall inform the learned respondent No.1 regarding the time fixed by this Court. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- N. NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ■fiS OFFICER SEC To, The Principal Secretary, Environment, Forests, Science and Technology Department Andhra Pradesh, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Forest Force), Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh. The Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle, Rajahmundry. One CC to Sri P. V. Ramana, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Services-I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ssb ,£ HIGH COURT DATED:24/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.924 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS