Date of reserved for orders : -- Date of pronouncement : 21.09.2026 Date of uploading : 21.09.2026 APHC010496762026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 27034/2026 Between: 1. NALADALA JALAIAH, S/0 LATE N.SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC - ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR, A.P.SPECIAL PROTECTION FORCE, PRESENTLY WORKING AT APGENCO, NELATUR (V), MUTTUKUR(M), SPSR, NELLORE (D) - 524344 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (SER.III) DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL, ANDHRA PRADESH SPECIAL PROTECTION FORCE, PATAMATA, AMARAVATHI. - 520010 3. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, 0/0 DGP APSPF, AMARAVATHI. 522020 4. COMMANDANT, TIRUPATI ZONE, APSPF UNIT, DHYANARAMAM, NEAR KAPILATHEERTHAM, ALIPIRI ROAD, TIRUPATI. (FORMERLY COMMANDANT-I, 0/0 DG SPF HEAD QUARTERS, SECUNDERABAD) 517507 ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 or any other appropriate Writ declaring the proceedings issued by the 4th Respondent dated 27.03.2012 in Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPS/2011-12, imposing a punishment of withholding of increment of pay for a period of one year with effect on his future increments and pension and the unauthorised absence of 109 days from 18.04.2011 A.N to 06.08.2011 FN was treated as Not on duty and the rejection of the appeal by the 3rd Respondent vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-12 dated 02.07.2012 followed by the rejection of the revision by the 2nd Respondent vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-13 and 0.0.No.A-58/2013 dated 01.02.2013 and the rejection of the Review Petition by the 1st Respondent vide Memo No.1880170/Ser-III/A2/2023 dated 21.11.2023 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and various provisions of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and the principles of Natural Justice, by setting aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to release all the consequential service benefits to the Petitioner. IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 suspend the proceedings issued by the 4th Respondent dated 27.03.2012 in Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPS/2011-12 imposing a punishment of withholding of increment of pay for a period of one year with effect on his future increments and pension and the unauthorised absence of 109 days from 18.04.2011 A.N to 06.08.2011 FN was treated as Not on duty and the rejection of the appeal by the 3rd Respondent vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-12 dated 02.07.2012 followed by the rejection of the revision by the 2nd Respondent vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-13 and 0.0.No.A-58/2013 dated 01.02.2013 and the rejection of the Review Petition by the 1st Respondent vide Memo No. 1880170/Ser-III/A2/2023 dated 21.11.2023 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and various provisions of A.P.Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and the principles of Natural Justice, by setting aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to release all the consequential service benefits to the Petitioner. 3 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SUMANTH AMIRAPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.27034 of 2026 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the penalty of “withholding of increment of pay for a period of one year with effect on future increments and pension” imposed by Respondent No.4 vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPS/2011-12, dated 27.03.2012 as confirmed in Appeal and Revision by Respondent Nos.3 and 2 respectively vide Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-12 and Rc.No.A3/PR/57/SPF/2011-13 and to declare the same as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to filing of the Writ Petition are as follows; The Petitioner while working as Head Constable in APSPF in High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad was imposed a penalty of “withholding of increment of pay for a period of one year with effect on future increments and pension” pursuant to a departmental enquiry initiated on account of un-authorized absence of the Petitioner for a period of 109 days i.e., from 18.04.2011 to 06.08.2011. The statutory Appeal was dismissed on 02.07.2012 and the Revision was dismissed on 01.02.2013. Thereafter, the Petitioner gave representations to the State Government for re-consideration of the penalty. The said applications were rejected on three occasions vide Memo dated 13.02.2025. It was 5 stated that the Director General was requested not to entertain such applications. The relevant portion is extracted below; “The attention of the Director General, Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force (APSPF) is invited to references cited. He is informed that Government already considered the request of Sri N. Jalaiah, ASI 1121, APSPF and rejected twice and now there is no scope to entertain again his case, as there is no provision in APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991. 2. The Director General, Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force (APSPF) is requested not to entertain such type of cases in future particularly the request of Sri N. Jalaiah, ASI-1121, APSPF and if any such request is made by the individual, the Director General, Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force (APSPF) is requested to take a serious view by calling for explanation from him.” 3. Now, the present Writ Petition is filed questioning the original order of penalty after a lapse of nearly 13/14 years from the date of impugned order. In the Writ Affidavit, the period of absence is not disputed, but the explanation given by the Petitioner is that during said period, the Petitioner was medically indisposed. The Petitioner was said to be suffering from severe back pain for 24 days i.e., from 18.04.2011 to 11.05.2011 as per the Certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District and was suffering from Typhoid Fever and jaundice from 12.05.2011 to 10.07.2011 as per the Certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Mandal Primary Health Centre, Singarayakonda. The said documents are doubtful and be that as it may, the medical condition of the Petitioner was not such that he could not 6 communicate to the authorities as to the reason for his absence during said period. The explanation can be accepted only when the health condition of the Petitioner made him immobile and he could not sent communication to the concerned authorities. The second aspect of the issue is that the penalty was imposed in the year 2012 and there is no explanation on behalf of the Petitioner as to the delay in filing the Writ Petition. It is well settled law that the representations would not extend the period of Writ Petitions. 4. Therefore, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and accordingly dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 21.09.2026 IS 7 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.27034 of 2026 Date: 21.09.2026 IS