APHC010458902025 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: 23676/2025 Between: 1. N PEDDA KOTAIAH, F S/O. LATE. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, SENIOR ASSISTANT, GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THE COMMISSIONER GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR. 2. THE COMMISSIONER DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, ANDHRA PRADESH, GORANTIA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MA UD REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...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 to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion as Office Superintendent without reference to C.C.No.2975 of 2023 (Cr.No.193/2009 of Pattapbhipuram P.S.) on the file of Honble Special 1st Class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise, Guntur and promote him as such by declaring the action of the Respondents in not Oc considering his case for promotion as Office Superintendent, though the 2 charge is not proved in the departmental inquiry in the same incident and already he is promoted as Senior Assistant pursuant to the orders of the erstwhile Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1889 of 2015, dated 27-04-2015 is totally exfacie illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and void apart from vioiation of Arts. 14, 16 of the Constitution of India and to pass 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 direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion as Office Superintendent without reference to C.C.No.2975 of 2023 (Cr.No.193/2009 of Pattapbhipuram P.S.) on the file of Hon'ble Special 1st Class Magistrate for Prohibition and Excise, Guntur and promote him as such pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RANGARAJULA RAJASEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.23676 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Office Superintendent without reference to C.C.No.2975 of 2023 (Cr.No.193 of 2009 of Pattapbhipuram P.S.) on the file of the Special Judicial 1st Class Magistrate for Prohibition & Excise, Guntur. 2. The Petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Assistant on 08.02.2002, subsequently; he was promoted as Senior Assistant by the proceedings dated 22.03.2016. It is stated that now he is eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of Office Superintendent. 3. While so, the 1st Respondent lodged a complaint against the Petitioner and two others before the Station House Officer, Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur, on 09.12.2009. Consequently, a criminal case was registered as Crime No.193/2009. Pursuant to the complaint, a departmental inquiry was initiated, and the inquiry report dated 29.01.2011 had exonerated the Petitioner of any involvement. Based on the said report, the Petitioner was reinstated into service on 08.04.2011. 4. Despite reinstatement, the Petitioner's claim for promotion to Senior Assistant was not considered in 2015. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner approached the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1889 of 2015 seeking promotion. The Tribunal granted interim order 4 on 27.04.2015, and pursuant thereto, the Petitioner duly promoted as Senior Assistant. Subsequently, the 1st Respondent published a provisional seniority list of Senior Assistants vide R.O.C.No.464/2007/C1, dated 13.11.2024, wherein the Petitioner was placed at Sl.No.2. However, his further promotion was denied solely on the ground of the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, while his junior, was promoted. As the said criminal case has been pending for nearly 15 years without any fault attributable to the Petitioner, the denial of promotion is arbitrary, unjust, and unsustainable, the present Writ Petition was filed. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that charge against co- accused in the criminal case was quashed by this Court in Crl.P.No.3161 of 2010 dated 13.10.2011. It is also contended that even after registration of criminal case, the Petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant as per orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No.1889 of 2015 and there is no reason to deny promotion on the very same ground of pendency of criminal case. 6. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the department is also not responsible for the pendency of the criminal case and non-consideration of promotion of Petitioner being in accordance with the Rules/executive instructions, no interference is warranted. 7. Heard the respective counsels, the criminal case though numbered in 2023 was initially registered against the Petitioner in year 2009. There is absolutely no reason as to why there is delay of fourteen years even to take 5 cognizance of the criminal case. At this stage, the Petitioner cannot be said to have contributed to the delay in taking cognizance by the concerned Court. Secondly, the co-accused along with the petitioner had filed Crl.P.No.3161 of 2010 and the same was quashed on 13.10.2011 at FIR stage itself taking note of the report of Municipal Commissioner. Thirdly, the Petitioner was promoted in 2016 as Senior Assistant after registration of criminal case and the same ground cannot be raised again to deny promotion. Fourthly, the Petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry on the very same charges. 8. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with following directions: i) The Respondents are directed to consider the case of Petitioner for promotion taking note of above mentioned reasons in paragraph No.5 subject to Petitioner possessing requisite qualification to the pose of Office Superintendent. ii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY,J Date: 08.09.2025 SNI 6 209 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 23676/2025 DATE: 08.09.2025 SNI