APHC010716692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 36738/2025 Between: 1. A SESHAGIRI RAO, S/O. A. BALAKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT(VIG-LLL-2) DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (VIGILANCE AND ENFORCEMENT) DEPARTMENT ANDHRA PRADESH AT VIJAYAWADA 3. THE ENGINEERLNCHIEFPUBLIC HEALTH, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRIC ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents in concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated in pursuance of the Articles of Charge issued in GoRT No. 410 MA and UD(Vig.lll-1) Dept dated 08-06-2017 and GoRT No. 335 MA and UD(Vig.lll-2) Dept dated 23-04-2025 of the 1st Respondent against the Petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91 GAD Dept dated 12-09-2022 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India, unfair and unsustainable and consequently direct the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated in pursuance of the Articles of Charges issued in GoRT No. 410 MAand UD(Vig.lll-1) Dept dated 08-06-2017 and GoRT No. 335 MA and UD(Vig.lll-2) Dept dated 23-04-2025 of the 1stRespondent against the Petitioner as per the time stipulation provided in G.O.Ms.No.91 GAD Dept dated 12-09-2022 and thereby grant all consequential benefits thereafter and pass IA 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 pleased to forthwith direct the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated in pursuance of the Articles of Charge issued in GoRT No. 410 MA&UD(Vig.lll-1) Dept dated 08-06-2017 and GoRT No. 335 MA&UD(Vig.lll-2) Dept dated 23-04-2025 of the 1st Respondent against the Petitioner as per the time stipulation provided in G.O.Ms.No.91 GAD Dept dated 12-09-2022 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SODUM ANVESHA 3 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.36738 of 2025 O R DE R: The present writ petition is filed questioning the inaction of the Respondents in concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated in pursuance of the G.O.Rt.No.410 MA&UD (Vig.III-1) Department dated 08.06.2017 and G.O.Rt.No.335 MA&UD (Vig.III-2) Department dated 23.04.2025 by the Respondent No.1 against the Petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91 G.A.D Department dated 12.09.2022, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the Respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings expeditiously. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows: The Petitioner is presently working as Executive Engineer, Nellore Municipal Corporation. It was submitted that in the year 2017 while, Petitioner was working as Deputy Executive Engineer, Ongole Municipal Corporation, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner under Rule 20 of A.P Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991 and articles of charge 5 was issued vide G.O.Rt.No.140 MA & UD(Vig.III-1) Department dated 08.06.2017. Similarly, another disciplinary enquiry was initiated and articles of charge were issued vide G.O.Rt.No.335 MA & UD(Vig.III-2) Department dated 23.04.2025. The Petitioner submitted his explanation denying the allegations, but there is no progress. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner by 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. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in simple cases, the enquiry should be completed within three months and in complicated cases, the enquiry should be completed within five to six months and seeks for expeditious conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-II would submit that the enquiry would be completed as 6 expeditiously as possible as mandated under the G.O.Ms.No.91 relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. 5. Heard the respective counsel. 6. The Government had issued the comprehensive guidelines for conclusion of departmental proceedings vide G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 12.09.2022 and clause 5 (ix) 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 complicatedcases, 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.’ 7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The Respondents shall ensure that the disciplinary enquiry against the Petitioner be concluded within a period 7 of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) The Petitioner shall cooperate for expeditious conclusion of the enquiry. (iii) In the event, enquiry is not concluded within time specified, the Disciplinary Authority, as well as Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer shall be answerable for the delay. (iv) No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 02.01.2026 chs 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 98 WRIT PETITION NO: 36738/2025 Dt. 02.01.2026 chs