APHC010354172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No: 18349/2025 Between: G. Chandra Mouli, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHEJARLA VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.18349 of 2025 O R DE R: The present Writ Petition is filed to declare that the G.O.Rt.No.138, dated 08.02.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2 without any basis of allegations and call for written statement and without conducting inquiry on charge memo, initiating disciplinary proceedings by issuing G.O.Rt.No.139, dated 08.02.2024 without any valid reasons as being illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the Writ Petition are as follows: The Petitioner has been working as a Secretary Grade-II at Agriculture Market Committee, Gajapathinagaram, Vizianagaram District since 2024. Earlier he worked as Assistant Secretary and Secretary Grade-I (FAC), Agricultural Market Committee, Palasa. A Charge Memorandum dated 08.08.2024 was issued on the Petitioner, wherein it was alleged that the Petitioner had wilfully colluded with Sri S. Chinni Krishna, Secretary Grade-II (U/s), AMC, Itchapuram and accepted AMC Etcherla Cheque No.641239, dated 14.09.2021 instead of Sri S. Chinni Krishna, 3 Secretary Grade II ( U/s), AMC, Itchapuram Personal account cheque for clearance of his personal outstanding dues towards House Building Advance and Motor Car Advance dues for an amount of Rs.10,62,500/- during his working period at AMC Palasa. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that issuance of the Charge Memorandum is without any factual basis. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the question of going into the factual appreciation of the charge framed against the Petitioner may not arise at this stage, and whether there is a factual basis to the charge framed against the Petitioner or not will be decided during the course of inquiry. 5. Having heard the respective counsel, Without going into the factual aspects sought to be urged by the Petitioner, it would be appropriate to direct the Disciplinary Authority to ensure that the inquiry shall be concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as specified in G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 22.07.2025 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18349/2025 Dt. 22.07.2025 eha