APHC010514162026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 28168/2026 Between: 1. S. SIMHACHALAM,, S/O S. MANDALIVADU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC.DY. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RETD.), TW ENGINEERING DEPT., SEETHAMPETA, MANYAM DISTRICT, PARVATHIPURAM, RIO. H.NO.12-89/11, CHINAMUSHIDI VADA, PENDURTHY (POST), SUJATHA NAGAR, VISHAKAPATNAM DISTRICT-530051. A.P ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, , REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. - 522503, AP. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, REVENUE COLONY, LABBIPETA, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 520010. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A AND E, ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DIST. ...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 toto issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings 2 pending against the Petitioner vide charge memos vide (i) Proceedings No. B2/CB3/202/2014-13, dt. 17.06.2014 and (ii) Proceedings No. B2Nig and Enft/Rep-41/2022-4, dt. 23.04.2024. (2017-18 issue) and making inordinate delay in concluding the same as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings pending against the Petitioner, forthwith, as per the time schedule fixed by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.91, GAD., dt 12.09.2022 (or) else drop the disciplinary proceedings as per the Law and further direct the Respondents to release the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner, forthwith 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 to direct the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings pending against the Petitioner, forthwith, as per the time schedule fixed by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.91, GAD., dt: 12.09.2022, or else drop the same, by extending the ratio of the orders in WP No. 21889/2026, dt: 05.08.2026, in favor of the Petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.28168 of 2026 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondent-Authorities in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner vide Charge Memorandum in Proceedings No.B2/CB3/202/2014-13, dated 17.06.2014, and Proceedings No. B2/Vig&Enft/Rep-41/2022-4, dated 23.04.2024, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts are as follows:- The Petitioner was initially appointed as Technical Work Inspector on 10.03.1986. Later, he was promoted to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer on 25.07.2020 and retired from service upon attaining the age of superannuation while working as Deputy Executive Engineer on 30.06.2025. 3. While the Petitioner was discharging his duties as Assistant Engineer, TW Sub-Division, Pathapatnam, Srikakulam District, a charge-memorandum was issued against the Petitioner on 17.06.2014, alleging certain irregularities in earth works and gravelling of road works. Later, while the Petitioner was discharging his duties as 4 Executive Engineer (FAC), TW, Seethampeta, another charge- memorandum was issued against the Petitioner on 23.04.2024, alleging certain irregularities in road works from Pedabagga BT road to Sandiguda of Srikakulam district. The Petitioner submitted his explanations to both the charge-memorandums, denying the allegations made therein. 4. As regards the charge memorandum, dated 17.06.2014, it was submitted that an Enquiry Officer was appointed on 22.03.2022 and an enquiry report was submitted to the Government on 05.07.2024. However, the Government disagreed with the enquiry report and issued a memo, dated 06.08.2025, calling for representations from the Petitioner and 17 others. Thereafter, the Petitioner submitted his representation on 04.10.2025, denying the allegations and requested to drop further action. However, no further orders were passed with respect to the aforesaid charge memorandum, and the disciplinary proceedings in respect of the same are still pending. 5. As regards the charge memorandum, dated 23.04.2024, it was submitted that though the same was issued in the month of April, 2024, there has been no progress in the enquiry and no Enquiry Officer or Presenting Officer has been appointed as on date. Further, the 5 Petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2025. Hence, the Writ Petition is filed. 6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner M/s Poodattu Amarender while placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration (SER.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022 submits that the Government had framed comprehensive guidelines fixing definite time frame for expediting the process of disciplinary cases in supersession of the previous guidelines. The learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that in simple cases, the enquiry should be completed within three (3) months and in complicated cases, the enquiry should be completed within five (5) to six (6) months and seeks for expeditious conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. 7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services Sri S. Raju would submit that the disciplinary enquiries would be completed, as expeditiously as possible, as mandated under G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022 relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and taking note of the submissions made by the Assistant Government Pleader, this Court is of the opinion that the Government had issued the comprehensive guidelines for conclusion of departmental proceedings 6 vide G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration (SER.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022 and Clause 5 (ix) thereof would be relevant for disposal of this case, which reads as under:- ‘ix. Government direct that in all simple cases the inquiry initiated against Government Servant shall be completed within three months either by Departmental Officers or Commissioner of Inquiries. In complicated cases, it shall be ensured that the inquiry should be completed within five to six months. The Secretaries to Government shall review the progress of the inquiries ordered in all disciplinary cases and submit a note on the cases pending beyond the stipulated time to Chief Secretary to Government and also the Chief Minister.’ 9. In view of the above, with the consent of both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the following directions:- (i) The Respondent-Authorities are directed to conclude both the enquiries within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) The Petitioner shall co-operate for expeditious conclusion of the enquiries. (iii) In the event, the enquiries are not concluded within the time specified, the disciplinary authority, as well as the Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer shall be answerable for the delay. 7 (iv) In default of concluding the enquiries within the time frame specified above, the retirement benefits of the Petitioner shall be released, without reference to the charge memorandums. 10. No order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 30.09.2026 chs 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 98 WRIT PETITION No.28168 of 2026 Dated: 30.09.2026 chs