Daravath Sreenu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not

¶16

2

¶17

considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Tahsildar on regular basis, even though he is eligible and qualified, on the ground that a Charge Memo vide G.O.Rt.No.1092 Revenue (Vigilance-Ill) Department dated 17-09-2025 is issued and enquiry is pending, in spite of the fact, the allegations are of the year 2021 and are in minor lapses, as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Tahsildar on regular basis in terms of G.O.Ms.NO.257 General Administration (Ser-C) Department dated 10-6-1999 without reference to pendency of disciplinary proceedings

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶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 pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Tahsildar on regular basis in terms of G.O.Ms.NO.257 General Administration (Ser-C) Department dated 10-6-1999 without reference to pendency of disciplinary proceedings pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.SUBBA RAO KORRAPATI

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for

¶27

3

¶28

promotion to the post of Tahsildar on regular basis on the ground of pending the charge memo dated 17.09.2025 against him, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶30

A charge memo vide G.O.Rt.No.1092, Revenue (Vigilance-III) Department dated 17.09.2025 was issued to the petitioner framing charges. The petitioner submitted a written explanation on 22.10.2025 requesting the respondent-authorities to consider his case for promotion in view of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 taking into consideration the initiation of enquiry and the timing of issuance of the charge memo which was issued before promotions.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for promotion, despite his seniority and clean service record.

¶32

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on instructions submits that it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was shown in the seniority list and he will be considered for promotion, if he is otherwise eligible.

¶33

4

¶34

Having heard the respective submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Tahsildar, on regular basis can be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999.

¶35

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Tahsildar on regular basis subject to the petitioner possessing requisite qualifications in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999 and also conclude the enquiry, if any pending, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

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

¶37

_______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶38

Date:21.04.2026 GK

¶39

5

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO: 10615 of 2026