APHC010447992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 23080/2025 Between: 1. R KASI VISWESWARA RAO, S/O BHIMAIAH, AGE 62 YEARS, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RETIRED), T.G.P. DIVISION, ALLAGADDA, KURNOOL DISTRICT. R/O, 85-3-10, V.L.PURAM, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT - 533101. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF, ADMINISTRATION WING, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, JALASOUDHA BUILDINGS GOVERNORPET, VIJAYAWADA. ...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 action of the respondents in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner vide charge memo (i) Proc. No. Rc/ENC/S1(2)/13082168/2013, dated 27.09.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and (ii) Charge Memo in G.O.Ms. No. 70 Water Resources (Vig.ll.(V and E) A.2) Department, 2 Dt.23.2.2017 issued by the 1st respondent as highly illegal, arbitrary, discrimination, unjust, contrary to instructions /guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022 and orders of this Hon’ble Court apart from violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently quash the said charges as violative of G.O.Ms.No.91, GAD, department dated 12.09.2022 and to extend all consequential retirement benefits by setting service records accordingly and pass such other order. IA 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 pass orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KIRAN KUMAR VADLAMUDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.23080 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioner vide Charge-Memorandums in Proc.No. Rc/ ENC/ S1(2)/ 13082168/ 2013, dated 27.09.2013 issued by Respondent No.2 and in G.O.Ms.No.70, Water Resources (Vig.II (V&E) A.2) Department, dated 23.02.2017 respectively issued by Respondent No.1, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts are as follows; The Petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer in the Water Resources Department by direct recruitment through A.P.P.S.C on 01.04.1989 and was promoted to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer on 11.03.2002. The Petitioner eventually retired from service as Executive Engineer on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2025. While the Petitioner was working as Deputy Executive Engineer in SMI Sub-Division, Rampachodavaram (FAC) to TW Sub-Division, Rampachodavaram during 2012, he was in charge of the works i.e. (i) Formation of WBM road from Potlawada to Nookaletwada from KM 0/0 to 2/0; and (ii) Providing WBM road from Pullangi to Chintagondla Junction from KM 1/0 to 2/0. 3. It is stated that on account of lapses on the part of the Petitioner, a Charge-Memorandum was issued by Respondent No.2 on 27.09.2013, 4 whereunder seven (7) Articles of Charges were framed. Due to the lapses on the part of the Petitioner the loss caused to the Respondent-State is approximately Rs.2,80,000/-. The Petitioner said to have submitted his explanation, however, the enquiry was not concluded as on date. 4. The second Charge-Memorandum was issued by Respondent No.1 while the Petitioner was working as Deputy Executive Engineer in SMI Sub-Division, Maredumilli, Rampachodavaram, whereunder certain lapses in execution of “Restoration of Minor Irrigation Tank across hill stream near Ganjugudem Village of Rampachodavaram Mandal” leading to excess payment in R.R. Masonry and excess quantity paid in Foundation Concrete to an amount of Rs.2,82,709/-. The Petitioner said to have submitted his explanation even to the said Charge-Memorandum. 5. The grievance of the Petitioner is that even though the Petitioner had retired from service on 30.06.2025, the enquiries initiated in the years 2013 and 2017 are still pending leading to non-finalization of retirement benefits and causing extreme hardship to the Petitioner. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Respondent-State would submit that the enquiry has been concluded and further steps would be taken to finalize further action against the Petitioner at the earliest. 7. Heard respective counsel. 5 8. As regards first Charge-Memorandum, the total loss said to have been caused to the Respondent-State is to an amount of Rs.2,80,000/- and the charge does not appear to be serious enough to warrant pendency of nearly 12 years in concluding the departmental enquiry. The nature of charge in first Charge-Memorandum, do not appear to be very complicated and the delay in conclusion is inexplicable and the very delay would tantamount to a punishment to the Petitioner. 9. As regards second Charge-Memorandum, the same was issued pursuant to a vigilance enquiry and non-conclusion of the same is wholly unwarranted. Even otherwise, the total loss caused to the Respondent-State is an amount of Rs.2,80,000/- and the nature of charge in the Charge- Memorandum do not appear to be very complicated and the delay in conclusion of disciplinary enquiry is inexplicable. 10. In view of the above and taking note of the fact that the enquiry is concluded and is before the disciplinary authority, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions; (i) The Respondents are directed to conclude the departmental enquiries initiated vide Proc.No.Rc/ENC/S1(2)/13082168/2013, dated 27.09.2013 and vide G.O.Ms.No.70, Water Resources (Vig.II (V&E) A.2) Department, dated 23.02.2017, within a period of four (4) months from today; (ii) In default, the departmental enquiry shall stand quashed without further reference to this Court; 6 (iii) The Respondents shall thereupon release the retirement benefits to the Petitioner. (iv) No order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 08.09.2025 IS 7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.23080 of 2025 Dated: 08.09.2025 IS