APHC010551162023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 3 TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NOS: 28706 OF 2023 & 3729 OF 2024 WRIT PETITION NO: 28706 OF 2023 Between: Sri Bathula Satyanarayana, S/o. Late Butchayya, Aged about 62 years, Occ. Radiographer, RIMS, G.H. Srikakulam District. A.P., R/o. Ravikantipeta, Amudalavalasa, Srikakulam District ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Building, Gollapudi Amaravati, Gunturu, AP. The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Viyayawada, Andhra Pradesh. The Director of Medical Education, old hospital Near RIy station Near para Medical Board office Vijayawada NTR Krishna district The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. The Medical Superintendent, Srikakulam Government Hospital Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh 2. 3. 4. 5. ...Respondents m 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 an order or direction, more in the natiire of Writ of Mandamus to declare vide RC.NO. 38437/E4.A/2014 dated 31-12-2022 issued by the 2nd respondent treating the period not regularizing the Suspension period from 28-5-2015 to 31-10-2016 as leave which he is eligible as per SR contrary to Fundamental rules (FR 54(B) 3 & 4 the not regularizing the Suspension is unconstitutional and illegal arbitrary and it amounts to violation of article 14,16,21 of the constitution of India, contrary to G.M. Tank vs State Of Gujarat & Anr and Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr and set aside the same and direct the respondents to regularized as per FR & SR with all consequential benefits with interest in terms of Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in L.Mehrotra and others vs state of UP and others 2002 SCC L&S 278 the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 suspend impugned order vide RC.NO. 38437/E4.A/2014 dated 31-12-2022 issued by the 2nd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES IV APHC010065092024 WRIT PETITION NO: 3729 OF 2024 Between: Sri Bathula Satyanarayana, S/o. Late Butchayya, Aged about 62 years, Occ Radiographer, RIMS, G.H. Srikakulam District. A.P., R/o. Ravikantipeta, Amudalavalasa, Srikakulam District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Its Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Building, Gollapudi Amaravati Gunturu AP 2. The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Viyayawada , Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Director of Medical Education, old hospital Near RIy station Near para Medical Board office Vijayawada NTR Krishna district 4. The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Medical Superintendent, Srikakulam Government Hospital Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondents 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 an order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare RC.NO. 940/A2./2022 Charge Memo dated 22-1-2024 issued by the 4th respondent and treating the period not regularizing the Suspension period from 26-5-2015 to 31-10-2016 as leave which he is eligible as per SR contrary to Fundamental rules (FR 54(B) 3 & 4 the not regularizing the Suspension is unconstitutional and illegal arbitrary and it amounts to violation of article 14,16,21 of the constitution of India contrary to G.M. Tank vs State Of Gujarat & Anr and Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr and set aside the same and direct the respondents to regularized as per FR and SR with all consequential benefits with interest in terms of Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in L.Mehrotra and others vs state of UP and others 2002 see L&S 278 the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 ePe praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High eourt may be pleased to suspend impugned order vide passed by the vide Re.NO. 940/A2/2022 Oharge Memo dated 22-1-2024 issued by the 4th respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following Common Order: APHC010551162023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 28706/2023 Between: 1.SRI BATHULA SATYANARAYANA, S/0. LATE BUTCHAYYA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC. RADIOGRAPHER, RIMS, G.H. SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. A.P., R/0. RAVIKANTIPETA, AMUDALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, GOLLAPUDI AMARAVATI GUNTURU AP. 2.THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIYAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE DIRECTOROF MEDICAL EDUCATION,OLD HOSPITAL NEAR RLY STATION NEAR PARA MEDICAL BOARD OFFICE VIJAYAWADA NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4.THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2 5.THE MEDICAL GOVERNMENT PRADESH. SUPERINTENDENT, SRIKAKULAM HOSPITAL SRIKAKULAM, ANDHRA N ...RESPONDENT(S): praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare 38437/E4.A/2014 dated 31-12-2022 issued by the 2nd respondent treating the period not regularizing the Suspension period from 28-5-2015 to 31-10-2016 as leave which he is eligible as per SR contrary to Fundamental rules (FR 54(B) 3 864 the not regularizing the Suspension is unconstitutional and illegal arbitrary and amounts to violation of article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India contrary to G.M. Tank vs State Of Gujarat AND Anr and Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. AND Anr and aside the same and direct the respondents to regularized as per FR AND SR with all consequential benefits with interest in terms of Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in L.Mehrotra and others vs state of UP and others 2002 SCC LBWS 278 the mterest of justice and to pass such other order. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India vide RC.NO. it set 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 suspend impugned order vide RC.NO. 38437/E4.A/2014 dated 31-12-2022 issued by the 2nd respondent and to pass such other order. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant leave to the respondents to file counter affidavit in WP.No.28706 of 2023 and to pass such other order. praying that in the 3 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Responclent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following: WRIT PETITION NO: 3729/2024 Between: 1.SRI BATHULA SATYANARAYANA, S/0. LATE BUTCHAYYA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC RADIOGRAPHER, RIMS, G.H. SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. A.P., R/0. RAVIKANTIPETA, AMUDALAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE GOLLAPUDI AMARAVATI GUNTURU AP DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, 2.THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, VIYAYAWADA , ANDHRA PRADESH. 3.THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, OLD HOSPITAL NEAR PARA MEDICAL BOARD NEAR RLY STATION OFFICE VIJAYAWADA NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT 4.THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5.THE MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT, SRIKAKULAM GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL SRIKAKULAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare RC.NO. Charge Memo dated 22-1-2024 issued by the 4th respondent and treating the period not regularizing the suspension period from 28-5-2015 to 31-10-2016 as leave, which he is eligible as per SR contrary to Fundamental Rules (FR 54(B) 3 86 4 the not regularizing the Suspension is unconstitutional and illegal arbitrary amounts to violation of article 14,16,21 of the Constitution of India contrary to G.M. Tank vs State Of Gujarat and Anr and Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and Anr and set aside the and direct the respondents to regularized as per FR and SR with all consequential benefits with interest in terms of Hon'ble Supreme court judgment in L.Mehrotra and others vs state of UP and others 2002 see Lands 278 the interest of justice and to pass such other order. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , more in 940/A2./2022 and it same 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 suspend impugned order vide passed by the vide RC.NO. 940/A2/2022 Charge Memo dated 22-1-2024 issued by the 4th respondent and to order. pass such other Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P LAKSHMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION Nos.28706 of 2023 & 3729 of 2024 COMMON ORDER: 1. W.P.No.28706 of 2023 is filed questioning the action of Respondent No.2 in issuing RC.No.38437/E4.A/2014, dated 31.12.2022 and not regularizing the suspension period from 28.05.2016 to 31.10.2016 and treating the same as leave for which the Petitioner is eligible as per SR contrary to F.R.54 (B) 3 & 4, as illegal and arbitrary. W.P.No.3729 of 2024 is filed questioning the action of 2. Respondent No.4 in issuing Charge Memo vide RC.No.940/A2/2022 dated 22.01.2024 not regularizing the suspension period from 28.05.2016 to 31.10.2016 and treating the same as leave for which the Petitioner is eligible as per SR contrary to F.R.54 (B) 3 & 4, as illegal and arbitrary. As both the cases are interrelated, a Common Order is 3. being passed. The facts in brief are as follows; 4. The Petitioner while working as a Radiographer in R.I.M.S. General Hospital, Srikakulam, a Charge Memo was issued to him under Rule 20 of A.P. Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991. A solitary Article of 2 Charge was framed against the Petitioner on the ground of his involvement in a criminal case and therefore the Petitioner has failed to \ maintain absolute integrity, discipline and devotion to duty and exhibited behaviour unbecoming of a Government Servant and violated Rule-3 of APCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. In the Statement of Imputations of Misconduct and Misbehaviour, 5. it is stated that the Petitioner is involved in a criminal case as per the complaint given by the Director, RIMS Hospital, Srikakulam on 28.05.2015. The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Srikakulam arrested the Petitioner on the same day, filed F.I.R in Cr.No.74/2015 on the allegation of forgery of signatures of Higher Officers of Medical and Health Department and issued appointment orders. The issuance of impugned Charge Memo is now questioned. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the case for which Charge Memo was issued had ended in acquittal on 25.07.2022 and this aspect was not noticed by the disciplinary authority before issuing the Charge Memo. It is further submitted that as the criminal case has been ended in acquittal, the impugned Charge Memo cannot 6. be sustained. 3 7. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the Respondents would submit that the involvement of Petitioner in a criminal case is a ground for issuance of Charge Memo and the same cannot be faulted with. 8. Having heard the respective counsel, this Court reasons as follows; In this case, the charge framed against the Petitioner in Annexure-I of impugned Charge Memo reads as under; “1 Sn B. Satyanarayana, Radiographer was involved in criminal case as per the complaint made by the Director, RIMS Hospital, Srikakulam on 28-05-2015, the Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Srikakulam arrested B. Satyanarayana on 28-05-2015 and filed FIR in Or. No. 74/2015 on allegation of forgery of signatures of Higher Offices of Medical and Health Department and issued appointment orders. He has underjudicial custody for more than 48 hours. 2. FIR in Or. No. 74/2015 on allegations. The Cr.No.74 of 2015 on the file of Station House Officer, 9. II Town Police Station, Srikakulam was investigated and a Charge Sheet was filed. The cognizance was taken by the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Srikakulam and was numbered as C.C.No.1135 of 2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 506, 471 R/w 34 of IPC. After thorough trial, the Petitioner was found not guilty of any 4 of the offences that were alleged against him vide Judgment dated 25.07.2022 and the acquittal was a clean acquittal. The relevant portion of the Judgment reads as under; “19. In the result, the Accused/A1 to A4 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 468 and 506 of IRC against Accused/AI; and under Section 471 r/w 465 of IRC against Accused/A2 to A4; and under Section 420 r/w 34 of IRC against Accused/AI to A4, as such the Accused/AI to A4 are acquitted under Section 248(1) of Cr.R.C. The Accused executed bonds for Rs.5,000/- in compliance with Section 437-A of Criminal Rrocedure Code, in order to their presence before the appellate Court, if any appeal is preferred against him.” In view of the acquittal in the criminal case, the impugned Charge Memo cannot be sustained by any stretch and continuance of the Charge Memo would be of abuse of disciplinary power conferred on the Respondent authority. t ensure 10. As regards the suspension period from 28.05.2015 to 31.10.2016 vide Proceedings in 11. had treated the Respondent No.2 RC.NO.38437/E4.A/2014, dated 31.12.2022 the period from 28.05.2015 to 04.09.2015 (100 days) as considered as Earned Leave and the remaining period from 05.09.2015 to 31.10.2016 was considered as reason given for treating the suspension Half Pay Leave. There is no period in different ways. 5 12. Therefore, in the absence of any reasoning in terms of F.R.54 (B) 3 & 4, the Respondent No.2 shall have to reconsider the same in accordance with the law. Accordingly, Writ Petitions are allowed with the following directions; i) The impugned Charge Memorandum issued vide RC.No.940/A2/2022, dated 22.01.2024 is quashed; ii) The impugned Proceedings issued by Respondent No.2 vide RC.NO.38437/E4.A/2014, dated 31.12.2022 is set-aside; iii) The Respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the period of suspension of the Petitioner from 28.05.2015 to 31.10.2016 in accordance with F.R. 54(B) 3 & 4 within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order; iv) No order as to costs. 13. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGi^RAR //TRUE COPY// OFFICER SEC To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Building, Gollapudi Amaravati Gunturu AP 2. The Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Viyayawada , Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Director of Medical Education, old hospital Near RIy station Near para Medical Board office Vijayawada NTR Krishna district 4. The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. Government Hospital Medical Superintendent, Srikakulam 5. The Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh 6. One CC to Sri PL 7. Two CCS to GP for Services IV High Lakshmana Rao, Advocate [OPUC] Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies TF HIGH COURT i DATED:22/07/2025 COMMON ORDER WP NOS. 28706 OF 2023 & 3729 OF 2024 s 0 6 Aue m mii Co.f ^ Current Section ALLOWING THE W.P.s WITHOUT COSTS