Cheepati Jeelani Basha v. the Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Jul 2026WP/2117/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh HC writ petition by railway employee challenging appointment of Inquiry Officer for departmental enquiry while identical charges pending in C.C No.20 of 2022 (Special Court for CBI Cases, Kurnool); disposed of on the ground that the issue relates to the Central Administrative Tribunal, with liberty to approach the appropriate forum; no costs.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of leaving it open to the Petitioner to raise his plea before the appropriate Court for redressal of his grievance. No costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶¶32

Cheepati Jeelani Basha Vs the Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

Date of reserved for orders : -- Date of pronouncement : 10.07.2026 Date of uploading : 10.07.2026

¶2

APHC010033072026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3460]

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 10^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 2117/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

CHEEPATI JEELANI BASHA, S/O LATE CHEEPATI. MOHAMMED HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC CHIEF LOCO INSPECTOR, R/O 13/ 183-C-12-B,VIJAY NAGAR COLONY, GUNTAKAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH515801

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, RAIL NILAYAM, SECUNDERABAD - 500 071. 2.

¶14

THE DIVISIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, TRSO/NED DA SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, NANDED DIVISION, NANDED, MAHARASHTRA-400104 3.

¶15

SHRI P VEERABHADHRA RAO, EI/HQ, INQUIRY OFFICER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, RAIL NILAYAM, SECUNDERABAD500003

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

¶18

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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 in issuing impugned order vide Ref. No.GTL/V/2015030021/M-01/16-17/JB, dt.23.12.2025 by appointing Respondent No.3 as an Inquiry Officer to conduct a departmental enquiry on charges which are sub-judice in a pending criminal case. vide C.C No. 20 of 2022 on the file of the court of the Special Court for CBI Cases, Kurnool, A.P as illegal, arbitrary, and colourable exercise of power and violative of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, the principles of natural justice, and the settled law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court and this Hon’ble Court. Consequently Set-Aside the impugned order vide Ref. No. GTL/V/ 2015030021/ M-01/16-17/JB, dt.23.12.2025 issued the Respondent No.2 and to direct the 2nd respondent not to proceed with the departmental enquiry in pursuance of the charge memo dated 2.5.01.2016 till the conclusion of the trial in C.C No.20 of 2022 on the file of the court of the Special Court for CBI Cases, Kurnool AP and accordingly to grant all consequential reliefs and pass such other orders.

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶20

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 suspend the operation of the impugned order vide Ref.No.GTL/V/2015030021/M-01/16-17/JB, dated 23.12.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2 and to direct the Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 not to proceed with the departmental enquiry in pursuance of the charge memo dated 25.01.2016, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such other orders.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.KHAJA KHUTUBUDDIN SHAIK

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.NARASIMHARAO GUDISEVA (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.2117 of 2026

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the appointment of Respondent No.3 as an Enquiry Officer pending criminal case vide C.C.No.20 of 2022 on the file of the Special Court for CBI Cases, Kurnool.

¶31

In this case, the Petitioner is an employee of South Central Indian Railways and the issue urged by the Petitioner in this case is relating to Central Administrative Tribunal.

¶32

In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the Petitioner to raise his plea before appropriate Court for redressal of his grievance.

¶33