::1:: APHC010066792026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 3873/2026 Between: 1. K. VISHNUVARDHAN REDDY,, S/O.K. NARASIMHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER (GRADE- LL), R/O K K AGRAHARAM,BUKKARAYASAMUDRAM, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (SERVICES) DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION AND SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT APIIC BUILDING, MANGALAGIRI 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SATHYA SAI DISTRICT AT PUTTAPARTHI 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT AT ANATAPURAMU 5. THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): ::2:: This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief: “to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Village Revenue Officer (Grade-1) without reference to the Articles of Charge in CCLA's Prcgs REV02/20/2025(e-2669929) dated 25-03-2025 of the 2nd Respondent is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner and promote the petitioner as Village Revenue Officer (Grade-1) without reference to the pending disciplinary proceedings as per Section 5(b) of A.P. State Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 along with all consequential benefits….” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he joined the Revenue Department as Village Revenue Officer (Grade-II) in the year 2019. During the period from 2023 to 2025, he worked at Sangala Village of Bathalapalli Mandal. At present, the petitioner is working as Village Revenue Officer (Grade-II) at Veparalla of Rayadurgam Mandal in ::3:: Ananthapuramu District. It is submitted that while the petitioner was working at Sangala Village Secretariat under Bathalapalli Mandal, the 3rd respondent, vide Rc.No.Ser-1/996/2024 dated 10.2024, issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and other VROs calling for an explanation with respect to alleged irregularities in converting assigned lands into freehold lands and the subsequent registrations made in respect of such lands. The petitioner submitted his explanation to the said notice. However, not being satisfied with the explanation, the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 25.03.2025, issued Articles of Charge against the petitioner alleging irregularities and framed one Article of Charge. It is relevant to submit that common disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner and a few other officials under Rule 20 of the A.P. Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991. The petitioner submitted his detailed explanation to the 2nd respondent in respect of the charges framed against him. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 23.06.2025, appointed the Joint Collector, Sathya Sai District, as the Inquiry Officer and, by separate proceedings of the same date, appointed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram, Sri Sathya Sai District, as the Presenting Officer. Thereafter, the Inquiry Officer, by memo dated 07.08.2025, directed the petitioner to submit a written statement of defence, and the petitioner accordingly submitted the same. However, there has been no progress in the disciplinary proceedings ::4:: thereafter. While so, the 4th respondent, vide Rc.No.Ser.II/2595/2023 dated 01.09.2024, published the provisional seniority list of Village Revenue Officers (Grade-II) working in the erstwhile Ananthapuramu District and called for objections, if any. In the said list, the petitioner was placed at Serial No.39 and was within the zone of consideration for promotion to the cadre of Village Revenue Officer (Grade-I). Subsequently, the 4th respondent, vide Rc.No.Ser-II/2595/2023 dated 23.01.2026, published the provisional list of eligible Village Revenue Officers (Grade-II) for promotion to the cadre of Village Revenue Officer (Grade-I). Surprisingly, the name of the petitioner was not included in the said list solely on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner immediately submitted a representation to the respondents requesting them to consider his case for promotion to the cadre of Village Revenue Officer (Grade-I). However, the petitioner’s case has not been considered solely on account of the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. The issue involved in the present case has already been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.550 of 2022 (State of A.P. vs. Ch. Venkata Rao), wherein it was held as follows- “4. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Services I has referred to G.O.Ms.No.66 General Administration (Services.C) Department, dated 30.01.1991 to ::5:: contend that when charges of misconduct are framed by the competent authority and served on the concerned delinquent officer, or a charge sheet has been filed against him in criminal court, his case for promotion is required to be deferred. 5. We have heard Mr. Aswartha Narayana, learned Government Pleader for Services I appearing for the appellants and Mr. G. Seena Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner, and perused the material available on record. The learned single Judge has referred to the Judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Secretary, Home Department vs. Motupalli Narasimha Raju (W.P.No.3099 of 2017), dated 27.08.2021, to hold that G.O.Ms.No.424 GA (Ser.C) department, dated 25.05.1976 is not applicable in the case of the petitioner, who is a constable and it is applicable to the selection post falling under Rule 5(a) and Rule 6 of the Rules, 1996, and the said G.O., does not come in the way of the petitioner to claim promotion during pendency of the departmental proceedings and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed for. 7. 7. In the Division Bench judgment in Motupalli Narasimha Raju (supra), a Coordinate Bench has held that the post of Head Constable is a non-selection post for the purposes of promotion and therefore, in view of Rule 5(b)(i) of the Rules, 1996, the promotion can be deferred only upon imposition of penalty and not otherwise. It has also been held that the additional embargo, if any created under a G.O., which is not issued in exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, would not override Rule 5(b)(i) of the Rules, which clearly states that promotion to a non-selection post may be denied only if the incumbent is subjected to a penalty and not otherwise. Thus, neither G.O.Ms.No.424, GA (Ser.C) department, dated 25.05.1976 nor G.O.Ms.No.66, General Administration (Services.C) department, dated 30.01.1991 would come in the way of the writ petitioner to claim relief of promotion as has been held by the learned single Judge. The writ appeal has no substance and it deserves to be dismissed. ::6:: 5. Following the said ratio laid down by the Division Bench, a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.21608 of 2024 disposed of the writ petition in similar terms. The said legal position is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion, if he is otherwise within the zone of consideration, in terms of Rule 5(b) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, without reference to the Articles of Charge dated 25.03.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:10.02.2026 klk ::7:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.3873 of 2026 Dt:10.02.2026 klk 156