In a writ petition challenging suspension and charge-framing proceedings, the High Court, with consent of counsel, disposed of the petition by directing the relevant respondent to conclude the inquiry within timelines fixed by the relevant Government Order.
Direction to Respondent No.2 to conclude the inquiry in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
,0
FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
P\ yoi
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR m
I
(ys
m*.
¥
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI /
WRIT PETITION NO: 19543 OF 2024
Between:
S.Ganga Rao, S/o Late Kanayya, Aged about 58 Years, Occ: Executive Officer (Grade - III) of Sri Venkateswara Swamy Group Temples, Narsipatnam Town and Mandal, Anakapalli District, (Currently under Suspension), R/o Saradanagar, Narsipatnam Village and Mandal, Anakapalli District, Andhra Pradesh
...PETITIONER
AND
Yelamanchili.Anakapalli District
...RESPONDENTS
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 a writ order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No.V2/20026/26/2024-1 dated 25.08.2024 framing charges against the petitioner and consequential suspension proceedings in Rc.No.V2/20026/26/2024-2 dated 25.08.2024 as bad, illegal, arbitrary. without application of mind, abuse of power, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set-aside.
lA NO: 1 OF 2094
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i in support of the petition, the High Court may be nd pleased to suspend the operation of 2 respondent suspending the petitioner proceedings in Rc.No.V2/20026/26/2024-2 dated 25 .08.2024.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.V.SASIDHAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 5: GP FOR SERVICESII
Counsel for the Respondent No.6 & 7: SRI B.JAGADESHKUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.8: FINANCE AND PLANNING
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010381902024
Tj-'-::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331] (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY .THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 19543/2024
Between:
S Ganga Rao
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Ap and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.D VSASIDHAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2.GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following:
:: ORDER ::
The above writ petition is filed under Article 226oftheConstitution of
India seeking the following relief:
“...to issue a writ order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2"'^ respondent in issuing
Page 2 of 4
SRS,J W.P.No.19543 of 2024
proceedings Rc.No.V2/20026/26/2024-1 dated 25.08.2024 framing charges against the petitioner and consequential suspension proceedings in Rc.No.V2/20026/26/2024-2 dated 25.08.2024 as bad, Illegal, arbitrary, without application of mind, abuse of power, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set-aside the and pass such other order or orders...”
2.^ Heard Sri D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appeared for the respondents.
- Though, the writ petition was filed challenging the suspension order of the petitioner dated 25.08.2024 (Ex.P1), learned counsel for the petitioner would confine his arguments and urged to direct the respondent authorities to complete the inquiry within the time lines fixed as per G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Ser-C) Department, dated 12.09.2022.
- Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services did not refute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
- The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Ser-C) Department, dated 12.09.2022 fixing timelines to complete the inquiry within three months in case of simple and six months in case of complicated cases.
- Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing respondent No.2 to conclude the inquiry in terms of
\
SRS,J W.P.No.19543 of 2024 -
Page 3 of 4
G.O.Ms.No.gi General Administration (Ser-C) Department, dated 12.09.2022
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPY//
<^d/- P VINOD KUMAR AsIlSTAi^r REGISTRAR
To,
n OFFICER SEC
Ankapalli District
Yelamanchili,Anakapalli District
MBT
m
HIGH COURT
DATED:06/09/2024
ORDER
WP.No.19543 of 2024
Vo<br>0 3 MAR 2025
o Co/.
^ . Current Section
^^fcs£ffSPATCV^
DISPOSING THE W.P
WITHOUT COSTS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to issue a writ of mandamus to declare the framing of charges and suspension proceedings illegal and void.
Whether to direct the respondent authorities to complete the inquiry within the time lines fixed under Applicable Government Order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Ganga Rao
The State of Andhra Pradesh
The Commissioner, Endowments Department
The Deputy Commissioner Endowments Department
The District Endowment Officer/Assistant Commissioner, Anakapalli
The Divisional Inspector Endowments Department
Subba Reddy Satti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
