IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY//' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ii PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4395 OF 2025 Between: Y. Murali Krishna, S/o Y. Ch. Bhusanna, Aged 57 years, working as Executive Engineer (R & B) R & B Division Nellore, R/o H.NO. 27-1-468, Balaji Nagar, Beside Swamy Class School, Nellore-524001. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, TR and B Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn.), Roads and Buildings Department, Vijayawada, Krishna District, State of 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 a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer in R and B Department, on mere pendency of Charge Memo Vide G. O. Rt. No. 194 TR B (VIG.R&B) Department, dated 27-07-2022 incident pertains to the year 2016-17 issued by 1st respondent, denial of promotion is illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of principles of Natural Justice, consequently direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer without reference to the pending Charge dated 27-07-2022, in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 257 dated 10-06-1999, on the same anology of similar directions of this Hon’ble Court passed in W.P.No. 25098 of 2024, which were granted by duly following the reported judgment of the Division Bench Govt., of A.P. rep by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department Vs. A. Rajeswara Reddy and G. O. Ms. No. 679, dated 1-11- 2008 lA 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 direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer R and B Department in the existing vacancy, without referring the pendency of G. O. Rt. No. 194 TR&B Department Dated: 27-07-2022, in terms of similar orders passed in W.P.No. 25098 of 2024, dated: 06.11.2024 pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 2: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: Order APHC010082562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY .THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4395/2025 Between; ...PETITIONER Y Murali Krishna AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Smt.B.Sreeteja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sarath, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-ll for respondents 1 and 2. i The petitioner, Executive Engineer (R&B), Nellore Division, filed the above writ petition to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner’s candidature for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer in (R&B) Department, due to pendency of charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.194 TR&B (VIG.R&B) Department, dated 27.07.2022 issued by the 1®' respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. \\ T 2 A charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.194 TR&B (VIG.R&B) Department, dated 27.07.2022 (Ex.P.1) was issued to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner submitted an explanation belatedly on 15.02.2025. Due to the pendency of the charge memo, the petitioner’s case is not considered for promotion. 3. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner confined her arguments and urged this Court to direct the 2^^ respondent to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 4. The Learned Assistant Government pleader did not refute the said submission and would submit that the respondent authorities will consider the petitioner’s case in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999. 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side directing respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer, if his case is in the zone of consideration, strictly in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999 whenever DPC is constituted. No order as to costs. 6. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUT^EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// K ' SECTION OFFICER J 1. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, TR and B Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), Roads and Buildings Department, Vijayawada, Krishna District, State of Andhra Pradesh 3. One CC to SRI BUGULU SREETEJA Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES II, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies To gsg HIGH COURT DATED: 19/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.4395 of 2025 15 MAR- 2C25 ^ Current Section ^ DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS