HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.20756 of 2025 O R DE R: This writ petition is filed declaring the proceedings dated 19.06.2025 issued by Respondent No.4 as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are as follows: Petitioner had retired from service on 31.03.2021 as Joint Director of Treasuries and Accounts Department. While he was in service, the Petitioner was issued a charge memorandum vide R.C.No.10898/B2/2012 dated 12.12.2012 stating that the Petitioner had violated the rules and making contract appointments without approval of the State Project Director by committing certain financial and other irregularities. The Petitioner was kept under suspension from 03.03.2014 to 03.01.2018. 3. The Petitioner submitted explanation denying the charges. Subsequently, the Petitioner was issued second memorandum on 12.12.2013 with Supplementary Articles of Charge with regard to huge expenditure incurred without administrative sanction by the then State Project Directors. Thereafter, the Petitioner was 2 issued a series of charge memos by the State Project Director and Officials without any evidence to substantiate the charges. The Petitioner submitted his explanation denying all the allegations. However, no action was taken on the explanations furnished by the Petitioner even after lapse of 10 years. 4. In that context, Petitioner filed W.P.No.14895 of 2023 declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for grant of service benefits treating the suspension as on duty. The said writ petition was disposed of on 28.06.2023 directing the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary enquiry within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and in default to release Pensionary benefits. As the enquiry was not concluded within the time specified and as retirement benefits were not paid, the Petitioner filed C.C.No.6707 of 2023 during the pendency of the contempt case, retirement benefits were sanctioned and paid to the Petitioner. 5. Parallelly, the Enquiry Officer had submitted a report on 10.05.2024 holding that all the charges against the Petitioner were not proved except the Supplementary charge which was 3 said to be partially proved. Though the Petitioner submitted explanation, no further action was taken thereon. Therefore, the Petitioner filed W.P.No.8793 of 2025 directing the Respondents regarding the suspension period from 03.03.2014 to 03.01.2018. The W.P.No.8793 of 2025 was disposed of on 09.04.2025 directing Respondents to consider the representation of the Petitioner. 6. Pursuant thereto, the impugned proceedings were passed stating that a provisional decision of imposition of punishment was taken as a charge was partially proven and a final show cause notice would be issued after obtaining recommendations of APPSC. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the consultation of APPSC is not required in view of amendment to A.P.Revised Pension Rules vide G.O.Ms.No.124 dated 04.12.2023. 8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the necessary action will be taken by the Respondents to ensure expeditious conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioner. 4 9. Heard Smt. M. Vidyavathi, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the Respondents. 10. Petitioner had also filed W.P.No.14895 of 2023 questioning the delay in conclusion of the disciplinary enquiry. This Court by its order dated 28.06.2023 disposed of the writ petition directing the Respondents to conclude the enquiry within a period of three months. If for any reason, the Respondents are unable to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within three months, the Respondents shall pay release all the retirement benefits and also pension to the Petitioner. In spite of the specific direction of this Court way back in the year, 2023 fixing time limit of three months, the proceedings against the Petitioner are still not concluded. 11. In that view, the writ petition is disposed of with following directions: (i) The Respondents are directed to conclude the disciplinary enquiry against the Petitioner within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5 (ii) In default, the suspension period of the Petitioner shall stand regularized and the Petitioner shall be entitled for payment of arrears of pay for the said period. (iii) No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. ___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 26.11.2025 KLP