Disposed

G.Anandratan v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Sept 2022WP/19499/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged preemptive proceedings surrendering the petitioner's services and disciplinary actions as arbitrary and violative of constitutional provisions. The bench recorded a statement confirming that services should continue and remuneration be paid pending the inquiry, leading to the disposal of the petition without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without touching merits; proceeding to record statement was sufficient.

G.Anandratan Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.19499 OF 2022

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶5

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶6

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.5 in issuing preemptive proceedings vide Roc.No.267/R&R/ 2022, Dated 01.04.2022 surrendering petitioner’s services to Respondent No.2 without even following due process of law and again issuing a second notice dated 18.04.2022 by Respondent No.2 asking petitioner’s explanation for initiating disciplinary proceedings and restraining him to attend office and stopping his salary for the month of April, May and June and continue to do as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also in violation of Article 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the preemptive proceedings of surrendering petitioner’s service made vide Roc.No.267/R&R/2022 Dated 01.04.2022 and pass such other orders....”

¶7

Heard Mr. A.Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the respondents.

¶8

During hearing learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contents urged in the writ affidavit and placed on record the proceedings of the 2^nd respondent, vide File No. ICD3314021/18/2022-SEC D-CORR, dated 05.09.2022, wherein it is clearly stated as follows:

¶9

¶10

“In the reference 2^nd cited, the Projection Administrator, Polavaram Irrigation Project has been appointed as an enquiry office and requested to send the enquiry report to this office at an early date. This office also informed that RDO, Jangareddygudem to continue the services of the individual till the enquiry completed/ until further orders.

¶11

Therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangaredigudem is directed to pay the remuneration for the period for which Sri G. Anand Ratan, Dy.EE (Rtd.,) attended the duties”

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner requested to record the statement cited supra and pass appropriate orders in this writ petition. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents conceded the same.

¶13

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition.

¶14

Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of, without touching the merits of the case. No costs.

¶15

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶16

___________________________ DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J

Date: 07.09.2022

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.19499 OF 2022

¶22

Date: 07.09.2022

¶23

G.Anandratan v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Anandratan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Issac Babu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

R.Siva Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

V Thukaram Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr.Repudi Bhushana Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K (T) Anusha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalapala Ananda Jyothi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh