St APHC010438782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER ^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No:22865 OF 2025 Between: Mediga Rama Subanna, S/o. Mediga Ranganna, Aged about 63 years, Occ: Retired employee, R/o.H.No.14-81/140/2-2, Beeramguda, Ameenpur, Sangareddy, Telangana - 502 032. Plot No.28, Maruthi Nagar, ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Education Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Board of Intermediate Education, Rep. by its Secretary, Ellite. Tadepalle, adj. Sono Vision, Tadepalli, Guntur. Andhra Pradesh 522501 School Tadepalli, Guntur Eswar ...Respondents Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of india praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction(s) particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to set aside the more pertaining to the suspension order dt. 22.03.2022 and charge memo dt. 03.06.2022 and set aside the same as the above proceedings are targeted towards the petitioner despite there being no involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime as duly ascertained by the four-men committee report dt. 24.03.2022 as arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release the pension and retirement benefits to the petitioner since his retirement on 31.05.2024 with all consequential benefits. 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities release provisional •pension to the petitioner pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR SERVICES-II Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI B.RAMESH, SC FOR BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION The Court made the following: APHC010438782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 22865/2025 Between: Mediga Rama Subanna ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.J SUDHEER 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.22865 of 2025 ORDER: In the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner is questioning the Charge Memorandum Dated 03.06.2022 issued by the Respondent No.2. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows: While the Petitioner was working as Principal in Government Junior College, Arlagadda, a Charge Memorandum dated 03 06 2022 was issued to the Petitioner In the Charge Memorandum, three Articles of Charges were framed. With regard to Article of Charge No. 1, the Petitioner, while working as Joint Secretary (Accounts) from 26.03.2021 to 03.01.2022 in the Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh, has failed to monitor the entire process of the payments from receipt of the bills from RIOs. Articles of Charge Nos. 2 and 3 are also in relation to the same. 3. The reason for filing the present Writ Petition is that a four-man committee was constituted in the Board to examine St 3 the said allegations, and the said Committee gave a Report. In the Report, it is stated that there is nothing specific against the Petitioner. 4. Sri J. Sudheer, learned counsel for the Petitioner, would submit that the report submitted by the four-man committee pointed out the misappropriation committed by employees and there is no reference with regard to misconduct or misappropriation by the Petitioner, context, the Petitioner filed the present Writ Petition for quashing the Charge Memorandum. He further submits that though the Petitioner had retired from service on 31.05.2024, the provisional pension is yet to be sanctioned, thereby causing difficulties to the dignified life of the Petitioner. other any In that 5. Alternatively, learned counsel for the Petitioner, by placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022, submits that the Government had framed comprehensive guidelines fixing definite time frame for expediting the process of disciplinary cases in supersession of the previous guidelines. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that in simple cases, the enquiry should be ■“N 4 completed within three months and in complicated cases, the enquiry should be completed within five to six months and seeks for expeditious conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the provisional pension is sanctioned to the Petitioner and the amounts would be released as expeditiously as possible. As regards the. Charge Memorandum, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the Charge Memorandum cannot be quashed on the basis of Committee Report and these are aspects to be evaluated by the Disciplinary Authority. It is further submitted that Charge against the Petitioner is lack of supervision and notwithstandin g the Committee Report, this aspect ought to be examined by the Disciplinary Authority. 7. After hearing the respective counsel, this Court is of the opinion that quashing of Charge Memorandum on factual aspects is extremely limited and disciplinary enquiries should be permitted to go on in normal circumstances. In this case, the emphasis is on the Committee Report, where nothing is said to have been stated against the Petitioner, but these are aspects 5 which the Disciplinary Authority should consider and this Court cannot assume the role of Disciplinary Authority. Apart from that, the nature of charges against the Petitioners are for violation of financial procedures and not of misappropriation. 8. However, the alternative argument of the Petitioner deserves merit. 9. As per G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022, the Government had issued the comprehensive guidelines for conclusion of departmental proceedings and Clause 5 (ix) would be relevant for disposal of this case which reads as under: ‘ix. Government direct that in all simple cases the inquiry initiated against Government Servant shall be completed within three months either by Departmental Officers or Commissioner of Inquiries. In complicated cases, It shall be ensured that the inquiry should be completed within five to six months. The Secretaries to Government shall review the progress of the inquiries ordered In all disciplinary cases and submit a note on the cases pending beyond the stipulated time to Chief Secretary to Government and also the Chief Minister.’ 6 10. Considering the fact that the Petitioner is a retired employee and his retirement benefits were withheld on account of disciplinary enquiry and taking note of the guidelines fixing a definite time frame for the conclusion of the Disciplinary Enquiries, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions; (i) The Disciplinary Enquiry initiated against the Petitioner on 01.01.2022 by the Respondent No.2 shall be concluded within a period of four (04) months from today. (ii) The provisional pension said to have been sanctioned to the Petitioner should be paid into the account of the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. (iii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-T. SRINIVASA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, School Education Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner of Intermediate , Education, Tadepalli, Guntur, t Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education Eswar Ellite, Tadepalle, adj. Sono Vision, Tadepalli, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522501. 4. OneCCto Sri J.Sudheer, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Services-ll, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One Cc to Sri B.Ramesh, SC for Board of Intermediate Education. [OPUC] ' 7. Two CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED: 10/09/2025 ORDER WP No.22865 OF 2025 2 0 SEP 2025 Co;) o ^SssCurrent Sectiop.''^*^ DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS