Disposed

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Sept 2024WP/14351/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a Deputy Warden suspended for a child sexual offence, challenged continuation of suspension beyond the legal limit. The Court held that the extension violated Government Order No. 22 limiting suspension to one year and directed the respondent to comply expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 4 directed to take appropriate steps to pass orders in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 22 dated 29.02.2024 as expeditiously as possible.

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION INIO: 14351 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao, S/:},Y.Venkateswar!u, Aged^51Years,Occ Secondary Grade Teacher, R/o D.No.14-2-472, Gowda Chenchu Colony, 8th Ward, Macherla Village and Mandal, Guntur District522426.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,^Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶12

The Director of Tribal Welfare, /'^ndhra Pradesh, Vijayawada.

¶13

The District Collector, Palnadu District, Palnadu.

¶14

The District Schedule Tribe Welfare and Empowerment Officer, Narsaraopet, Palnadu District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 cf the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therev/ith, the High Court may

¶17

be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring impugned action of 4th respondent in continuing the petitioner under suspension inspite of completion of investigation and filing charge sheet and further action in issuing impugned proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 18.04.2024, extending the period of suspension of the Petitioner without considering the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.22 General Administratibn Department, dated 29.02.2024, for review of orders of suspension as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, apart from contrary to the orders issued by Government in G O.Ms.No.22 General Administration Department, dated 29.02.2024 consequently set aside the proceedings Rc.No.14/76/2022, dated 11.10.2022, and further review of proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 18.04.2024 dt 18.04.2024, wherein suspension period is extended with all consequential benefits.

¶18

8A NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

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 to grant interim suspension of impugned proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 18.04.2024, by directing the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in view of expiry of outer limit prescribed for suspension of employee under G.O.Ms.No.22 GAD Department, dated 29.02.2024, Pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. iA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances . stated in the affidavit filed in support of the pejtition, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be direct the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service by suspending the impugned order issued in Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 13-04-2024 in view of guidelines issued by

¶20

¶21

Government in G.O.Ms.No.22 General Administration Department, dated 29.02.2024, Pending disposal of the present Writ Petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. G V SHIVAJI

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES II

¶24

The Court m?de the fcllowing: ORDER

¶25

APHC010284542024

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶27

[3331]

¶28

MONDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 14351/2024

¶32

Between:

¶33

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao,

¶34

...PETITIONER

¶35

AND

¶36

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶37

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶38

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶39

1.G VSHIVAJI

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶41

1.GP FOR SERVICES II

¶42

The Court made the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶45

“ declaring impugned action of 4^^ respondent in continuing^the petitioner under suspension inspite of completion of investigation and filing charge sheet and further action in issuing impugned proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 18.04.2024, extending the period of suspension of the Petitioner without considering the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.22 General Administration Department, dated 29.02.2024, for review of orders of suspension as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, apart from contrary to the orders issued by Government in G.O.Ms.No.22 General

¶46

Administration Department, dated 29.02.2024, consequently^setaside the proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 11.10.2022, and further review of proceedings Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 18.04.2024, wherein suspension period is extended with all consequential^{benefitsandpass} such order or orders ...”

¶47

The petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher vide proceedings dated 07.03.1990 and posted in ST Ashram School, Bellamkondavaripalem, Macherla Mandal. Subsequently,^{on13.08.2022,the} petitioner was deputed and posted as Deputy Warden in PTWRS (Boys) Rentachinthala Mandal, Palnadu District. While the petitioner is working in the said station, a criminal case was registered for the offenses punishable under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) and he was placed under suspension vide proceedings in Rc.No.T4/76/2022, dated 11.10.2022. No charges of disciplinary are pending against the petitioner. The petitioner’s suspension was reviewed on 18.10.2023, extending the suspension by six more months. Again by proceedings dated 18.04.2024, the petitioner’s suspension^was reviewed, extending the suspension till 17.10.2024, due to the^gravityof the offense under the POCSO Act. Impugning the proceedings, dated 18.04.2024, the above writ petition is filed.

¶48

Heard Sri G.V. Shivaji, learned counsel for the petitioner,^and Sri R.S. Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader^{forServicesforthe} respondents.

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that^{theGovernment} issued G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 29.02.2024, reducing the outer limit of suspension of government servants from two years to one year and further directed the authorities to review the order of suspension against government servants both in ACB and departmental inquiries at the end of every four months instead of six months. However, respondent No.4 without considering

/ /

. the said G.O., passed the impugned review proceedings, extending the ^ petitioner’s suspension by six months. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services has not disputed regarding the petitioner’s suspension on 11.10.2022. He placed the copy of instructions furnished by the District ST Welfare and Empowerment Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District along with the copy of proceedings in Rc.No.T4/76/2022 dt. 22.07.2024.

¶54

Perused the proceedings dated 22.07.2024. The relevant portion of the said proceedings is extracted hereunder;

¶55

'28. In this regard, the individual since under suspension beyond 1 year and as per GO.22 the outer limit is crossed, therefore APVC need not be consulted as per G.O.Rt.No.2285 GAD (Ser.ll) Dept. Dated 18-5-2012, while the review shall be taken up at Head Of Department level as per G.O.Ms.No.578, General Administration (SER.c) dt. 31.12.1999. Further, since Charge sheet is filed in pending Criminal Case in POCSO Court, Guntur. The Dist. S.T. Welfare & Empowerment Officer Palnadu already addressed a letter to the Joint Collector, Palnadu about the conduct the DISC to find his caste claim. In this regard The Joint Collector, Palnadu issued a letter for conduction of Joint Enquiry by the concerned DLSC members of Palnadu District, vide in the reference 18**^ cited but the DLSC has not completed the Joint enquiry yet.

¶56

In this regard, it may also be considered that in the event of reinstatement of the alleged individual, his services shall be placed at primary schools wherein small children studies for reducing alleged problems in future and there are only 3 Ashram Schools functioning with 02 Schools for only Girls and one are Co.education Ashram School, and there is total 10 Primary schools have been functioning in Erstwhile Guntur District.

¶57

S ‘

¶58

In view of the above, the Director of Tribal Welfare, A.P., Vijayawada is requested that the case of Sri Y. Srinivasa Rao, SGT (U/s) may be reviewed as above and please issue appropriate orders to reinstate him into services. The case is posted to 29.07.2024.”

¶59

¶60

As seen from the material, there is no dispute about the petitioner’s suspension on ,11.10.2022. During the period when the petitioner is placed under suspension, G.O.Ms.No.86, dated 08.03.1994 is operating. According to the said G.O., the outer limit of suspension is two years. Subsequently, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 29.02.2024 reducing^the outer^limit of suspension to one year from two years. In pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.22, the petitioner’s suspension was reviewed on 18.04.2024, extending the suspension for six months, contrary to G.O.Ms.No.22. The instructions placed on record would further manifest that the authorities are contemplating reinstatement of the petitioner into service. 8. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing respondent No.4 to take appropriate steps to pass orders in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 22 dated 29.02.2024 as expeditiously as possible. No costs.

¶61

¶62

To,

¶63

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

¶64

Sd/- M. SURYANADHA REDDY //TRUEE COPY// DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶65

The Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶66

The Director of Tribal Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada.

¶67

The District Collector, Palnadu District, Palnadu.

¶68

The District Schedule Tribe Welfare and Empowerment Officer, Narsaraopet, Palnadu Distnct.

¶69

One CC to Sri. G V Shivaji Advocate [OPUC]

¶70

Two CCs to GP for Services II, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶71

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED; 09/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.14351 of 2024

DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yaddanapudi Srinivasa Rao, 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

K.G. Chandrasekhar Vs Sri Sumit Kumar

Adireddi China Appa Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kondeti Dasu Vs Sri S Naga Laksmi

Bellamkonda Dinesh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G Vedavalli Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Karlapudi Venkata Krishnaiah Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh