Date of reserved for orders : --- Date of pronouncement : 09.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010343912026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE 9th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18463/2026 Between: 1. P.KRISHNA MOHAN, S/O P.GOPALAIAH (LATE), AGED 62 YEARS, OCC. SUPRIENTENDING ENGINEER (RETIRED) R/O.45-24-2-J-3, RAMALINGESHWAR NAGAR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Secretariat, 522237 ...RESPONDENT 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 a writ, order or direction more in the nature o Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in continuing the departmental enquiry against the petitioner for more than one year, pursuant to the Articles of Charge issued in G.O.Ms.No.38, Water Resources (VIG-III2) Department, dated 30.06.2025, in respect of allegations pertaining to the year 2021, as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, and contrary to the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration 2 (Services) Department, dated 12.09.2022 and the impugned action is also violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from being vitiated by inordinate delay and arbitrary exercise of power and consequently to direct the respondents to finalise the disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner within reasonable time that as prescribed by this Honble court or else release all pension benefits including full pension and 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 pleased to direct the respondents to finalise t e disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner within reasonable time that as prescribed by this Hon'ble court or else release all pension benefits including full pension and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. HARINATH REDDY SOMAGUTTA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.18463 of 2026 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not concluding the departmental enquiry, which was initiated against the Petitioner pursuant to articles of charge issued vide G.O.Ms.No.38, Water Resources (VIG.III.2) Department, dated 30.06.2025, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows: The Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer on 16.03.1989 and subsequently was promoted as Superintending Engineer on 13.06.2025. While so, a charge memo was issued on 30.06.2025 against the Petitioner and other 02 officials alleging certain irregularities. Subsequently, the Respondent initiated disciplinary proceedings under Rule 20 of A.P.Civil Service (CC&A) Rules, 1991 and issued Article of Charge vide G.O.Rt.No.341, dated 30.06.2025. The Petitioner submitted his explanation denying the allegations. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner in filing the Writ Petition is that though the charge memorandum was issued in the month of June, 2025 and despite denying the allegations, there has been no progress in the enquiry till date, and the Petitioner retired from his service on 30.11.2025, 4 and due to the pendency of the departmental enquiry, the retirement benefits of the Petitioner were not released to him. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4. 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. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-II submitted that the Respondent has taken further steps in relation to the progress of the enquiry and due to certain administrative issues, there is delay, however, submitted that the enquiry would be completed as expeditiously as possible as mandated under the G.O.Ms.No.91 relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. 6. Having heard the learned counsel 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 5 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 Respondent shall take further steps with regard to the progress of departmental enquiry initiated against the Petitioner, as required under APCS (CCA) Rules, 1991 forthwith and shall ensure that the enquiry shall be concluded within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in default, Respondent shall release the retirement benefits of the Petitioner to him. (ii) The Petitioner shall cooperate for expeditious conclusion of the enquiry. 6 (iii) In the event, if the 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, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall standclosed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 09.07.2026 chs Whether the order is: Speaking ✔ Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable ✔ 7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 87 WRIT PETITION No.18463 of 2026 Dated:09.07.2026 chs