Disposed

K v. Krishna Rao v the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Sept 2024WP/19220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the retention of disciplinary proceedings by the State despite a lapse of one year. The court disposed of the petition by consent, directing authorities to consider the petitioner for promotion ignoring the relevant charge memo.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioner for promotion ignoring the charge memo and conclude inquiry promptly.

K v Krishna Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

[3331 ]

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 19220 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

K V KRISHNA RAO, S/o K.V.Gopal Krishna , Aged about 55 years, Working as Assistant Planning officer (Assistant Director),kakin^ada Urban Development Authority, kakinada, kakinada District.

¶10

...PETITIONER(S)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (VIG.I) Department Secretariat Buildings2nd block, Velagapudi, Vijayawada.

¶13

The Director of Town and country planning.. Government^ofAndhra Pradesh, M.A and U.D Buildings, West Annapurna Nagar, Gorntia, Guntur, Guntur District

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 to issue an appropriate Writ, direction, or Order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents delay in initiating and continuing the Disciplinary Proceedings vide charge memo 6923/2022/M 1.dated 30-01-2023 issued by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner, though 1 years is elapsed and set aside the same by holding the same it as highly illegal, unjustified and violation of the rules in force and with direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Deputy Director of Town and Country planning from the post of Assistant Director of Town and Country planning without reference to charge memo 6923/2022/M 1.dated 30-01-2023 issued by the 2nd respondent.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

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 direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Director of Town & Country planning from the post of Assistant Director of Town & Country planning without reference to charge memo 6923/2022/MI .dated 30-01-2023 issued by the 2nd respondent.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitloner(s):SRI. M V S SAI KUMAR

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶20

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶21

APHC010369612024

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶23

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶24

[3331]

¶25

TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 19220/2024

Between:

K V Krishna Rao

...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh and another. ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶35

1.M VSSAI KUMAR

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶37

1.GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶38

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶39

The writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in continuing the disciplinary proceedings vide charge memo No.6923/2022/M 1 dated 30.01.2023 issued by the 2"“ respondent against the petitioner though a year has elapsed, as illegal and arbitrary.

Page 2 of 4

SRS,J Wp_19220_2024

Heard Sri K.K.Raghuveer, learned counsel representing^SriM.V.S.Sai Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appearing for the respondents^1and2.

¶44

A charge memo vide N0.6923/2022/M 1 dated 30.01.2023 (Ex.P.1) was issued against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a written explanation dated 03.02.2023 (Ex.P.2).

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner is entitled to be promoted, however, the respondent authorities are not considering the petitioner’s case given the aforementioned charge memo. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services while not refuting the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent authorities will consider the petitioner’s case in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999.

¶46

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without touching the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the consent of both the counsel, at the stage of admission, directing the respondents to consider ^ the petitioner’s case for promotion if he is in the^zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Deputy Director of Town & Country planning without

¶47

Page 3 of 4

¶48

SRS,J Wp_19220_2024

¶49

reference to Ex.P.1 charge memo in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999. The respondents also conclude the inquiry in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022. No order as to costs.

¶50

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶51

SD/- K. TATA RAO //TRUE COPY// DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶52

To,

¶53

SE OFFICER

¶54

A/?n n Administration and Urban Department, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶55

Secretariat Buildings2nd block, Velagapudi, Vijayawada.

¶56

Pmdp![h Government of Andhra Guntur GmfurS Nagar, Gorntia,

¶57

One CC to SRI. MVS SAI KUMAR Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

Pradesh.

¶59

[OUT^^^^° SERVICES IV ,High Court Of Andhra

¶60

Two CD Copies

NPC

•»

HIGH COURT

NPC

DATED:03/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.19220 of 2024

O 18 OCT 202<i S
60
^ . Current Section *

¶69

DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

K v. Krishna Rao v the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K v. Krishna 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Macharla Sri Rama Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sabbavarapu Srinivas Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Khaja Mohiddin Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Reddi Simhachalam Vs the State of Ap

Lenka Rama Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Banala Sudharshanam Vs the State of Ap