Disposed

D.Sreehari v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Dec 2020WP/7507/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, directed the concerned authority to conclude pending disciplinary enquiries within six weeks, citing adherence to Government orders and Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the third respondent to complete the enquiry within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

D.Sreehari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION NO.7507 OF 2020

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the

¶4

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶5

“Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not concluding the long pending disciplinary Charges vide G.O.Rt.No 863 Revenue Vig V Department Dated 13.62.013 issued by the 15t respondent for the incident pertains to the year 20.10.2012 as illegal arbitrary and in violation of existing specific instructions of the Government for early conclusion and as well as the judgment of the Honble Apex Court reported in P.V. Mahadevan v. M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board¹ and accordingly set aside the same consequently direct the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings in terms of G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008 and on the same analogy of orders passed in W.P No.20872 of 2018 dated 21.6.2018 and W.P No.12583 of 2019 dated 30.8.2019 failing which the charges deemed to be quashed”

¶6

The only grievance of this petitioner before this Court is that, an enquiry was initiated and an Enquiry Officer was appointed, notice was served to this petitioner and charges were framed. But, the proceedings are not terminated till date, though seven years have been elapsed which is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008 and judgment of the Apex Court reported in P.V. Mahadevan v. M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board (referred supra) and requested to issue a direction as stated above.

¶7

Fairly, learned Government Pleader for Services-I requested to issue appropriate direction to the Enquiry Officer to complete the enquiry as expeditiously as possible.

¶8

1 (2005) 6 Supreme Court Cases 636

¶9

MSM,J WP.No.7507 of 2020

¶10

¶11

In view of the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I, by applying the principle laid down in the judgment of the Apex Court reported in P.V. Mahadevan v. M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board (referred supra) and G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008, concerned authority/third respondent is directed to complete the enquiry within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶12

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶13

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall also stand closed.

¶14

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶15

Date:21.12.2020 Note: copy by 28.12.2020 b/o SP

D.Sreehari v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Sreehari v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kannuri Bangarayya at Baburao (Died) and 2 Othrs Vs K. Nageswara Rao, E.G.Dist and 4 Othrs

M/S Kalyan Complex Vs Smt. Vadami Devi at Bidami Devi

Dutta Venkateswara Rao Vs Akula Edukondala Venkateswara Rao

M v Dp Kumar Vs the State of Ap

Y.Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sidum Sukesh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh