APHC010396112025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19957 OF 2025 Between: N.Srinivasa Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19957 OF 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Commissioners of State Tax, on account of pendency of departmental enquiry, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to file the present Writ Petition are as follows:- The Petitioner was appointed as Commercial Tax Officer, Chinna Waltair, Visakhapatnam Division vide Orders dated 18.12.1998 and his service was regularized in the year 2013. Subsequently, the Petitioner was promoted as Deputy Commissioner (CT), which was re-designated as Joint Commissioner of State Tax. 3. While so, Articles of Charges was issued vide G.O.Rt.No.239 Revenue (VIG.VI) Department, dated 09.03.2023 against the Petitioner alleging that the Petitioner had developed a private website parallel to GST Portal and thereby exhibited lack of integrity and discipline. The Petitioner had submitted written explanation denying the allegations. Subsequently Inquiry Officer was appointed on 08.01.2024, but the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner were not concluded even after lapse of two years. 4. Due to pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the Respondent Authorities did not consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Commissioners of State Tax. In that scenario, the Petitioner submitted a representation for considering his case for promotion, however, the Respondent No.1 issued Memo No. REV01-CCST0CCTE (PROM)/4/ 2022-CT-1, dated 25.01.2023 rejecting the claim of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Commissioner of State Tax. Questioning the same, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Government has provided timeline for concluding departmental enquiries specifically three months in case of simple cases and six months in case of complex cases in terms of G.O.Ms.No.679 dated 01.11.2009 read with G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022, inspite of the same, the Respondents were not adhering to the aforesaid timelines in concluding the enquiry, therefore, the Petitioner cannot be denied his right to be considered for promotion. Even otherwise, the Petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents on the other hand submits that enquiry would be concluded as expeditiously as possible. 7. Having heard the respective counsel and taking note of the fact that there is no progress in the departmental enquiry contrary to the time frame as fixed vide G.O.Ms.No.91, dated 12.09.2022, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition, with the consent of both the counsel at admission stage, with following directions: (i) The Respondents are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Commissioners of State Tax in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, if the Petitioner is in the zone of consideration with requisite qualifications. (ii) The Respondents are also directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iii) The Disciplinary Authority as well as Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer shall be answerable for the delay in concluding the enquiry within the time frame as mentioned above. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 31.07.2025 KK