APHC010576152025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 30644/2025 Between: 1. K.SAMUEL, S/O K.NAGANNA AGED 57 YEARS, OCC E 410543, DRIVER YEMMIGANUR DEPOT, APSRTC, R/O H.NO.9/1539 SANTHINAGAR, YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. TRANSPORT R AND B DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DEPOT MANAGER, , YEMMIGANUR APSRTC, YEMMIGANUR. KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...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 grant appropriate relief more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent Proceedings of suspension and simultaneously issued Charge Sheet vide Proceedings No.01/802(01)/2025 YMG Dated 13.10.2025 , which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the contrary to Rule (8) of ARCS (CC and A) Rules, 1991,and Rule 26-A of AP Civil Services(Conduct) Rules, 1964 set aside the same and issue consequential directions to the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service with all consequential benefits, including arrears of salary, etc. and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent vide Proceedings No.01/802(01 )/2025- YMG Dated:13.10.2025 , and consequently to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service, forthwith, pending disposal of the main writ petition, and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S SYAMSUNDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed questioning the order of suspension and charge memo vide proceedings No.01/802(01)/2025-YMG dated 13.10.2025 and No.01/802(01)/2025 dated 13.10.2025 invoking the power vested under Rule 8 of APCS (CC&A) Rules, 1991 and Rule 26-A of AP Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, respectively, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The petitioner is working as Driver since 33 years in Yemiganur Bus Depot. While so, the impugned proceedings of suspension and charge memo has been issued on the ground that the petitioner had committed theft of 20 litres of HSD (High Speed Diesel) oil from the DGT (Depot Garage Transport) and had violated the instructions of the higher authorities by proceeding towards ZWS, Kadapa, on 09.10.2025 instead of on 08.10.2025. 3. Though the writ petition is filed challenging the suspension order as well as order of charge memo, learned counsel for the petitioner restricted his relief in the writ petition with regard to the suspension order only. 4. Heard Sri S.Syam Sunder, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has unblemished career of 33 years and the impugned proceedings was issued based on a report of the Security Inspector, Kurnool District, on 11.10.2025. However, the said report was not furnished to the petitioner and further submitted that the petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation to the 2nd respondent explaining the offences about the allegations on 21.10.2025. 6. Learned Standing Counsel would submit that the representation of the petitioner would be considered and appropriate decision will be taken in that regard. 7. The purpose of suspending an individual is to ensure that the individual does not interfere with the preliminary enquiry. In this case, the preliminary enquiry was said to have been completed by the Security Inspector, Kurnool District, and a report dated 11.10.2025 was submitted. In furtherance of the report dated 11.10.2025, the petitioner was also issued a charge memo and the question of petitioner in interfering with the preliminary enquiry would not arise. 8. Considering the submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders with regard to the requirement of continuance of the petitioner under suspension taking note of his long unblemished career of 33 years and the fact that preliminary enquiry was concluded. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, pending if any shall stand closed. ___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 13th November, 2025 RKS