Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19135 (AP)

PALLAVOLU KISHORE BABU v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/7584/2026 · 2026-03-22

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010140472026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7584/2026 Between: 1. PALLAVOLU KISHORE BABU, S/O CHINNAIAH, MALE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC GOVERNMENT TEACHER, R/O PRAKASAM COLONY, KANDUKURTOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 238 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, VIDYA BHAVAN, VENKATADRI TOWERS, ATMAKUR (V), MANGALAGIRI (M), GUNTUR (DIST.) - 522503. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. ...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 issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or 2 appropriate writ to 1) to declare the inaction of the Respondent No.3 in continuing or keeping the petitioner under suspension even after completing four (4) months period of suspension without framing charges even after completion period 90 days as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India and violation of G.O.Ms.No.22 dt.29.02.2024 and violation of Apex Court Judgment Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs Union of India. and Consequently 2) Direct the Respondent No.3 to reinstate the petitioner into the service as SGT, MPPS, Yerraballi, Komarolu (M), Prakasam District with all consequential benefits including the continuity of service and full pay and allowances. 3) or to pass 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 pass orders on the petitioner's representation dt.8.02.2026 taking into consideration the G.O.Ms.No.22 dt.29.02.2024 and revoke Rc.No.3602/B2/2025proceedings dated:31.10.2025 issued by the Respondent No.3 and Apex Court Judgment passed in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs Union of India and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PERIKALA PRAKASH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES III 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7584 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri Perikala Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents. 2. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has submitted that the Writ Petitioner has been suspended on 31.10.2025 vide Rc.No.3602/B2/2025. Learned Counsel would submit that since then, there is no development in this regard and that the Government has not reviewed the cases of the Writ Petitioner in terms of the prevailing Government Orders. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to G.O.Ms.No.22, General Administration (SER-C) Department, dated 29.02.2024. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Para No.5 of the said G.O, which stipulates that the Government is obligated to review an Order of Suspension at the end of every four months. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to Para No.21 of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India through 4 its Secretary and Anr., : 2015 7 SCC 291. Para No.21 of the said Judgment is usefully extracted hereunder: “21. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a suspension order should not extend beyond three months if within this period the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee; if the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the Government is free to transfer the person concerned to any department in any of its offices within or outside the State so as to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against him. The Government may also prohibit him from contacting any person, or handling records and documents till the stage of his having to prepare his defence. We think this will adequately safeguard the universally recognised principle of human dignity and the right to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of the Government in the prosecution. We recognise that the previous Constitution Benches have been reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time-limits to their duration. However, the imposition of a limit on the period of suspension has not been discussed in prior case law, and would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Furthermore, the direction of the Central Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal investigation, departmental proceedings are to be held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us.” 3. Having considered these aspects, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Competent Authority to consider the cases of the Writ Petitioner 5 in terms of Para No.5 of G.O.Ms.No.22, General Administration (SER-C) Department, dated 29.02.2024. The Review Committee is also directed to consider the case of the Writ Petitioner within a period of four (04) weeks from today. The Review Committee and the Official Respondents are directed to take into account the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India through its Secretary and Anr.,:2015 7 SCC 291 and also the Representation submitted by the Writ Petitioners dated 08.02.2026. 4. With the above observations and directions, these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 23.03.2026 PSA 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7584 of 2026 Date: 23.03.2026 PSA