APHC010492482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. K YADAGIRI, K S/O. K. NARASIMHA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC SENIOR SCIENTIFIC OFFICER, O/O. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL (ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY) VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MH AND FW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VADAPALLI RAMESH 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 25292/2025 K YADAGIRI, K S/O. K. NARASIMHA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC SENIOR SCIENTIFIC OFFICER, O/O. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL (ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY) VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MH AND FW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): for the Petitioner: VADAPALLI RAMESH [3460] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY K YADAGIRI, K S/O. K. NARASIMHA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC SENIOR SCIENTIFIC OFFICER, O/O. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL (ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY) VIJAYAWADA, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MH AND FW DEPARTMENT, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DRUGS CONTROL ADMINISTRATION AND LABORATORY), VIJAYAWADA, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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.25292 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondents in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner vide Charge Memo bearing G.O.Rt.No.736, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (VC.1) Department, dated 20.09.2022 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to conclude the enquiry expeditiously and consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Joint Director (Laboratory). 2. The Petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Analyst in the year 1998 and subsequently, he was promoted as Junior Scientific Officer on 02.12.2011 and further promoted as Senior Scientific Officer on 01.02.2017. It is stated that now he is eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of Joint Director (Laboratory). While so, a Charge Memo was issued to the Petitioner vide G.O.Rt.No.736, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (VC.1) Department, dated 20.09.2022 whereunder two charges were framed against the Petitioner. 4 3. Charge No.1 pertains to the Petitioner has issued a test report for a drug sample as standard quality stating that the sample complied for all quality tests whereas, the Central Drugs Laboratory, Kolkata have declared the sample portion of the injection as not of standard quality and that the same is deemed to the spurious and the 2nd charge pertains to the Petitioner did not take prior permission from the Head of the Department in the prescribed format for purchase of property. 4. It is stated that after serving the above charge memo, the Petitioner submitted written statement of defence refuting the aforesaid charges and no Enquiry Officer or Presenting Officer was appointed by Respondent No.1 till date. While so, the promotion for the post of Joint Director (Laboratory) is being considered and the apprehension of the Petitioner is that his case would not be considered for promotion in view of the pendency of the disciplinary enquiry. It was in that context, the present Writ Petition was filed. 5. 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 5 comprehensive guidelines fixing definite time frame for expediting the process of disciplinary cases in supersession of the previous guidelines. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in simple cases, the enquiry should be 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 and consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Joint Director (Laboratory). 6. Having heard the respective submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the Government had issued the comprehensive guidelines for conclusion of departmental proceedings vide G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022 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 6 and submit a note on the cases pending beyond the stipulated time to Chief Secretary to Government and also the Chief Minister.’ 7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The Respondent No.1 shall appoint an Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer as required under APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991 forthwith and shall ensure that the enquiry shall be concluded within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) The Petitioner shall cooperate for expeditious conclusion of the enquiry. (iii) In the event, enquiry is not concluded within time specified, the Disciplinary Authority, as well as Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer shall be answerable for the delay. (iv) The Respondents are directed to consider the Petitioner’s case for promotion to the Post of Joint Director (Laboratory) subject to the Petitioner possessing requisite qualifications in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 7 v) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 18.09.2025 Ivd 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.25292 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 Ivd