APHC010029502023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 050 fE- FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 1437 OF 2023 Between: Shaik Kaiesha, S/o. Late Shaik Kareem, Age 44 years Occ: Employee, H.No.65-9-929/1, 9/6, Arundalpet, Old Guntur, Kothapet, Guntur District 522001 Private ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director of Municipal Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District The Regional Director-Cum-Commissioner, Municipal Administration , Guntur District Bapatia Municipality, rep. by its Commissioner, Bapatla, Guntur District Venkatagiri Municipality, rep. by its Commissioner, S.P.S.R. Nellore 3. 4. 5. ...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 a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the orders issued by the 1®' respondent Government in G.O.Ms.No.895 MA & UD dt.27.5.2013 issuing articles of charges under Rule 20 of ARCS & CCA Rules without having any power, authority and jurisdiction and competence contrary to Rule 9(2)(b) of A.P.Revised Pension Rules 9(7) of Revised Pension Rules and also on the ground of inordinate delay in initiation and non finalization of departmental proceedings as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to release the pension, pensionary benefits and differential amount towards pension during the period of suspension from 1.4.1992 to 9.12.1992 treating the said period as on duty and period out of employment ie., from 27.11.1998 to 19.12.2004 as on duty keeping in view of the orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.6083/2006 with M,A.No.408/2006 dt. 1.4.2009 with interest @ 14% from the date of due to date of realization in the interests 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 issue Interim Direction staying all further proceedings in pursuance to Articles of Charges issued in G.O.Ms.No.895 MA & UD dt.27.5.2013 pending disposal of the above W.P. lA NO: 2 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 issue Interim Direction directing the respondents to forthwith release the pay and allowances for the suspension period from 1.4.1992 to 9.12.1992, and 2 suspension period from 27.11.1998 to 19.12.2004 which includes dismissal from service keeping in view of the orders passed by the APAT in O.A.No.6093/2006 with M.A.No.408/2006 dt.1.4.2009 pending disposal of the above W.P. nd lA NO: 3 OF 2023 Between: The Bapatla Municipality, rep. by its Commissioner, Bapatia Municipality, Bapatia District. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER AND 1. Shaik Kalesha, S/o. Late Shaik Kareem, Age 44 years Occ: Private Employee, H.No.65-9-929/1, 9/6, Arundalpet, Old Guntur, Kothapet, Guntur District 522001 ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Director of Municipal Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District The Regional Director-Cum-Commissioner, Municipal Administration , Guntur District Venkatagiri Municipality, rep. by its Commissioner, S.P.S.R. Nellore 3. 4. 5. ...RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the Interim Orders passed by this Hon'ble Court against the 4 respondent in lA No.02/2023 in W.P.No.1437 of 2023, Dt:24.01.2023. th Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. V. RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3:GP FOR SERVICES IV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5:M/S. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI.se FOR MUNICIPALITIES 7 The Court made the following order: APHC010029502023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 1437/2023 Between: 1.SHAIK KALESHA, S/0. LATE SHAIK KAREEM, AGE 44 YEARS OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, H.NO.65-9-929/1, 9/6, ARUNDALPET, OLD GUNTUR, KOTHAPET DISTRICT 522001 GUNTUR ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ADMINISTRATION, MUNICIPAL AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, , ANDHRA PRADESH, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3.THE REGIONAL DIRECTORCUMCOMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT 4.BAPATLA MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER BAPATLA, GUNTUR DISTRICT 5.VENKATAGIRI MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,S.P.S.R. NELLORE ...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 in the nature of Mandamus declaring the orders issued by the 1st respondent Government in G.O.Ms.No.895 MA and UD dt.27.5.2013 issuing articles of charges under Rule 20 of ARCS and CCA Rules without having any power, authority and jurisdiction and competence contrary to Rule 9(2)(b) of A.P. Revised Pension Rules 9(7) of Revised Pension Rules and also on the ground of inordinate delay in initiation and non finalization of departmental proceedings as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to release the pension, pensionary benefits and differential amount towards pension during the period of suspension from 1.4.1992 to 9.12.1992 treating the said period as on duty and period out of employment i.e. from 27.11.1998 to 19.12.2004 as on duty keeping in view of the orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.6083/2006 with M,A.No.408/2006 dt.1.4.2009 with interest @ 14 percent from the date of due to date of realization in the interests of justice and to pass such other order. 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 issue Interim Direction staying all further proceedings in pursuance to Articles of Charges issued in G.O.Ms.No.895 MA & UD dt.27.5.2013 pending disposal of the above W.P. and to pass such other order. lA NO: 2 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 issue Interim Direction directing the respondents to forthwith release the pay and allowances for the suspension period from 1.4.1992 to 9.12.1992 and suspension period from 27.11.1998 to 19.12.2004 which includes dismissal from service keeping in view of the orders passed by the APAT in O.A.No.6093/2006 with M.A.No.408/2006 dt.1.4.2009 pending disposal of the above W.P. and to pass such other order. lA NO: 3 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 vacate the Interim Orders passed by this Hon'ble Court against the 4'^ Respondent in lA No.02/2023, Dt:24.01.2023 and may pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P V RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.P C REDDY (SC FOR SERVICE MUNICIPALITIES (SPSR, NELLORE) 2.Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, Standing Counsel for Municipalities 3.GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.1437 of 2023 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the impugned G.O.Ms.No.895, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, dated 27.05.2023, issued by Respondent No.1 against 1. the father of Petitioner i.e. Late Shaik Kareem under Rule 20 of Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980. The facts in brief are as follows; 2. The father of the Petitioner by name late Shaik Kareem was the permanent employee and had retired from service as Junior Assistant from Venkatagiri Municipality on 31.12.2007. Late Shaik Kareem was posted at Bapatia Municipality in the year 1991-1992. On certain allegations, the father of the Petitioner i.e. Shaik Kareem was implicated in Criminal Case No. 173 of 1993 and the II Additional First Class Magistrate, Bapatia sentenced him for one year imprisonment apart from Rs. 1,000/- penalty vide Judgment dated 27.07.1998. Prior to that, said Shaik Kareem was kept under suspension on 01.04.1992 and he was reinstated into service on 2 d c 1 •9 09.12.1992. In Crl.A.No.203 of 1998 filed thereon, the District & Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction of late Shaik Kareem vide Judgment, dated 25.03.2001. 3. Thereafter, late Shaik Kareem had filed Criminal Revision No.224 of 2001 before this Court and this Court allowed the same vide Judgment dated 13.06.2003 and the conviction was set-aside. On account of confirmation of conviction in the Criminal Appeal, the Petitioner was dismissed from service and consequent to his acquittal, the Petitioner was reinstated into service on 15.12.2004. Thereafter, a disciplinary enquiry was initiated and the Charge- Memorandum issued on 05.08.2006 was quashed by this Court in W.P.No.19246 of 2009. 4. While so, the impugned Charge-Memorandum was issued against Shaik Kareem by the Respondent-State vide G.O.Rt.No.895, dated 27.05.2013 under Rule 20 of ARCS & CCA Rules, 1991, wherein three (3) Articles of Charges were framed, which pertain to the failure of Shaik Kareem to maintain registers such as cash books, petty cash books and paid vouchers and allegations allied thereto. As per the Charge-Memorandum, loss of amounts of Rs.12,150/-, Rs.36,721/-, Rs.23,230/- and Rs.2,26/- were attributed towards late Shaik Kareem on account of alleged misconduct. After issuance of the impugned Charge-Memorandum, Shaik Kareem died 07.02.2019. However, the enquiry was not concluded. As the retirement benefits were not being paid to the family of the late Shaik Kareem, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 5. on A Counter-Affidavit is filed by Respondent No.5-Municipality, wherein it is admitted that late Shaik Kareem had retired from 6. service on 31.12.2007. As there is no dispute to the fact that late Shaik Kareem had retired from service on 31.12.2007, the learned counsel for the Petitioner Sri P.V. Ramana would submit that the impugned Charge- Memorandum cannot be sustained as the issue is beyond the prescribed time limit of four (4) years as mandated under Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 and the same cannot be sustained. Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner is that as the said Shaik Kareem had expired, the disciplinary proceedings are abated and the Respondent authorities are bound to disburse the death benefits to the family of 7. date Shaik Kareem. 4 The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents does not dispute the fact that the impugned Charge- Memorandum is beyond the time limit of four (4) years as contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and in view of the death of late Shaik Kareem, the disciplinary enquiry also stands abated. 8. 9. Reasoning: The time limit for issuance of Charge-Memorandum against a retired employee is four (4) years from the date of incident/event. In the present case, Shaik Kareem had retired from 31.12.2007 and the impugned Charge-Memorandum is issued on 27.05.2013 and the same is beyond the time limit prescribed in Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980. The relevant portion of Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) is extracted below for ready reference; service on 9. Right of Government to withhold or withdraw pension; 1) 2) (a) (b) The Departmental proceedings, if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re-employment; (i) 5 % (li) shall not be in respect of any event which took place than four years before such institution;’’ more 07.02.2019 and in Secondly, Shaik Kareem had expired on 10. view of Rule 9 (vii) of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, the stands abated. As regards the pay and enquiry against him allowances for suspension periods as sought by the Petitioner, this Court, at this length of time, is not inclined to remit that aspect to the Respondent authorities. In that view, the Writ Petition is allowed with following directions; issued by Municipal impugned Charge-Memorandum G.O.Ms.No.895, (i) The Respondent Administration and 27.05.2013 against the father of Petitioner i.e. Sk. Kareem is No.1 vide Urban Development Department, dated quashed; (ii) The Respondents shall release the pensionary benefits and towards pension during the period of differential amounts suspension i.e. from 01.04.1992 to 09.12.1992 by treating the duty to the successors of late Shaik Kareem; same as on (iii) The period of out of employment of late Shaik Kareem i.e. from 27.11.1998 to 19.12.2004 shall be treated as on duty, only for the purpose of fixation of pay on reinstatement.; 6 (iv) The Respondents shall pay interest @ 9% p.a. on the amount due to late Shaik Kareem from the date of retirement i.e. 31.12.2007; (v) The above exercise should be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; (vi) No order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary Municipal Administration Development Dept, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director of Municipal Administration, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District 3. The Regional Director-Cum-Commissioner, Municipal Administration, Guntur District 4. The Commissioner, Bapatia Municipality, Bapatia, Guntur District 5. The Commissioner, Venkatagiri Municipality, S.P.S.R. Nellore 6. One CC to Sri P. V. Ramana, Advocate [OPUC 7. One CC to M/s. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, SC for Municipalities [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Services-IV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies. and Urban ssb HIGH COURT DATED:31/10/2025 ORDER WP No. 1437 OF 2023 f 0 6 NOV 2025 Sectioox^y ^'^SgQUSSlSS^ ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS