Allowed

S Aswini Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Sept 2022WP/21762/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court, in a writ petition, held that pending disciplinary proceedings should not bar a government servant's promotion. It directed the respondents to consider the petitioner for promotion as Deputy Range Officer without reference to the impugned charge memo and to complete the pending enquiry expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioner for promotion to Deputy Range Officer without reference to the charge memo and to complete pending disciplinary enquiry expeditiously.

S Aswini Kumar Vs The State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶2

Writ Petition No.21762 of 2022

¶3

ORDER:-

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶5

India, seeking the following relief:-

¶6

“……..to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of “Writ of Mandamus” declare the action of the respondents herein in issuing the impugned Charge Memo vide G.O.Rt.No.15, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology (Sec.IV) Department, dated 14.2.2020 as highly illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the settled law, and consequentially, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash or set aside the impugned G.O.Rt.No.15, dated 14.2.2020 by declaring that the petitioner herein is entitled for promotion as Deputy Range Officer.”

¶7

Heard Mr. Eathakota Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

¶8

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3274 of 2020, dated 12.2.2020, W.P.No.12473 of 2020, dated 29.07.2020 and W.P.No.9095 of 2021, dated 29.4.2022 and W.P.No.15793 of 2021, dated 01.08.2022 and the similar order may be passed in this writ petition also.

¶9

Though the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents, has not refuted the above submission, however, furnished instructions received from the Chief Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle vide Rc.No.2166/2018-M8, dated

¶10

¶11

20.7.2022, stating that the case of the petitioner was not considered for promotion to the category of Dy. Range Officer at the time of finalization of panel, since the charges pending against the petitioner has arisen due to the recommendation of the Vigilance and Enforcement Department and the case is under examination at Government level.

¶12

In similar matters, this Court has already passed orders directing the respondents therein to consider the cases of the petitioners for promotion, as and when promotions are effected, without reference to the disciplinary proceedings pending against them.

¶13

Therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Range Officer, without reference to the charge memo issued vide G.O.Rt.No.15, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology (Sec.IV) Department, dated 14.02.2020. Further, the respondents are directed to complete the disciplinary enquiry pending against the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

¶14

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

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

¶16

____________________________ Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

Date: 12.09.2022.

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶21

Writ Petition No.21762 of 2022

¶22

Date: 12.09.2022

¶23

S Aswini Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S Aswini Kumar 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

Dr.Garimella Prabhakar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G Krishnaiah Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. Ambati Rama Mohan Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G.S.H. Pushpa Leela Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kommareddy Srinivasa Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

K.v.Padmavathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh