APHC010395572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) O 'O' Q: 501 WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No: 19959 OF 2025 Between: M.Surendra Babu, S/o. M.V. Stibba Rao, Aged 46 years, Dy. Range Officer, Naidupalem Section, Vinukonda Range, O/o. the FRO, Vinukonda, Palnadu District, R/o.Plot No.407, Block-A, Jaya Krishna Apartments, Vinukonda Post & Mandal, Palnadu District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary, Environment, Forest and Science & Technology Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 3. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force, State of Andhra Pradesh, Aranya Bhavan, Mangalagiri, 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the dropping the charges issued vide G.O.Rt.No.1692, Dt. 12.07.2022 against the petitioner on par with 386 respondents 1 and 2 in not r charges were dropped vide Engineers on whom the same or similar G.O.Rt.No.100, Dt.11.03.2025 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to drop further action against the petitioner on par with 386 Engineers. 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 respondents 1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer without reference to the charge memo Dt. 12.07.2022, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES-I Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3:GP FOR SERVICES-II The Court made the following order: r 1 APHC010395572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19959/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER M Surendra Babu AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I 2.GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19959/2025 The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in not dropping the charges issued vide G.O.Rt.No.1692, Dt. 12.07.2022 against the Petitioner on par with 386 Engineers on whom the same or similar charges were dropped vide G.O.Rt.No.100, Dt.11.03.2025 as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows: The Petitioner was initially appointed as Forest Section Officer on 15.05.2006 and thereafter he was promoted as Deputy Range Officer on 09.07.2013. The next available post for promotion to the Petitioner is Forest Range Officer. While so, a Charge Memo was issued to the Petitioner vide G.O.R.T.No.1692, dated 12.07.2022 wherein a solitary article of charge was framed against the Petitioner under Rule 20 of the A.P. Civil Services (CC & A), Rules, 1991. Though the Petitioner had submitted his explanation, the same was pending. 3. The Article of Charge was that the Petitioner had recommended payment for inferior quality of cement concrete 3 work in construction of check dam and caused loss of Rs.89,076/- to the Government exchequer in violation of Government Norms and Neeru-Chettu guidelines. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the work undertaken was principally by the Water Resources Department and the entire work including tenders in construction of check dam was undertaken by the employees of Water Resources Department and the role of the Petitioner in the work was only to supervise. While so, the Respondent/State which had initiated disciplinary enquiry against 386 Engineers/Officers in the Water Resources Department with regard to the very same works, had issued G.O.R.T.No.100 Water Resources (Vig.ll (V&E) Department, dated 11.03.2025 dropping the disciplinary action against all the 386 Engineers of Water Resources Department and therefore, the same may be extended to the Petitioner. 5. Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that for passing the proceedings against the Petitioner and similarly situated employees working in the Forest Department, proposals were sent to the Government on 21.07.2025 to take necessary action on par with G.O.R.T.No.100, dated 11.03.2025 4 and the issue is pending before the Government. The grievance of the Petitioner to file the present Writ petition is on account of thp fact that promotions are being denied to the post of Forest Range Officer and the Charge Memo issued in the year 2022 is coming in the way for considering the case of the Petitioner for promotion. 6. Having heard the respective counsel and taking note of the fact that 386 Officers in Water Resources Department have been exonerated from the disciplinary proceedings and the recommendation proposal sent by the Forest Department to drop disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioner and similarly placed on 21.07.2025, the Petitioner ought to be considered for promotion. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of with the following direction: i) The Respondent Authorities are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the Post of Forest Range Officer without reference to the Charge Memo issued vide G.O.R.T.No.1692, dated 12.07.2022. 7. (ii) There shall be no order as to costs. 5 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B. PRASADA RAO assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary Water Resources Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Special Chief Secretary Environment, Forest and Science & Technology Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. Secretariat, 3. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force State of Andhra Pradesh, Aranya Bhavan, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 4. One CC to Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Services-I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CCs to GP for Services-ll, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. ssb high court DATED;06/08/2025 ^ ? AUG 2025 =; ORDER WP No. 19959 OF 2025 i ’^Curremsecnon . DISPOSING THE WRIT WITHOUT COSTS petition