APHC010604092024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 31476/2024 Between: 1. B RANI SAMYUKTHA, W/O RANNESH, AGE 32 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS TOWN PLANNING SUPERVISION AT AMALAPURAM MUNICIPALITY. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (VIG-I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MGM CAPITAL, GROUND FLOOR, NRI HOSPITAL, JUNCTION, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMRAVATI. ...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 pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature in WRIT of MANDAMUS aggrieved by the action of the Respondent in not considering Petitioners case for promotion to the post of Town Planning Officer at 2nd Respondent Directorate of Town Country Planning which is highly illegal, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law 2 and violations of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith consider Petitioners case promotion to next level cadre post of Town GO Ms No 257 General Planning Officer as per Administration (SER.C) Director Dated 10.6.1999 and as per law without referring the pending Departmental Go Rt No 478 Dated 1.8.2023 of proceedings vide Respondent and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to direct the Respondents to consider Petitioner’s case for promotion to next level post of Town Planning Officer as per GO Ms No 257 General Administration (SER.C) Director Dated 10.6.1999 and as per law without referring the pending Departmental proceedings vide G.O.Rt.No 478, Dated 1.8..2023 of 1st Respondent and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The petitioner, a Town Planning Supervisor, filed the above writ petition in not considering her case for promotion to the post of Town Planning Officer due to the pendency of charge memo vide G.O.R.T.No.478 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.I) Department, dated 01.08.2023 (Ex.P.1), as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri S.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S.Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appearing for respondents. 3 3. A charge memo vide G.O.R.T.No.478 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.I) Department, dated 01.08.2023 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a written defence on 05.09.2023 (Ex.P.2). Despite submitting the written defence, the inquiry has not been completed so far. 4. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 12.09.2022, fixing timelines to complete the enquiry for simple cases three months and for complicated cases six months respectively. 5. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his arguments and urged to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion in promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services did not refute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the learned 2nd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion, strictly in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, if the petitioner’s case is in the zone of consideration. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 02.01.2025 SNI 4 197 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.31476 of 2024 Dated: 02.01.2025 SNI