Disposed¶33

Pampana Vijaya Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh.

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Mar 2026WP/21369/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

APHC WP 21369/2021 High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda 03.03.2026 Pampana Vijaya Kumar Senior Assistant suspension M S N Charities Kakinada East Godavari endowments charge memo Rc. No.A2/167/2021 dated 18-3-2021 reinstatement suspension period treated as leave proceedings 30.06.2024 writ petition closed no costs Article 226 Articles 14 16 21 25 300A Constitution Section 151 CPC IA No. 1 of 2021 D V Sasidhar T Balaji GP for Endowments State of Andhra Pradesh Revenue (Endowments) Dept.

What did the court decide?

None on merits. The Writ Petition was closed (with no costs) after the Court recorded that the petitioner had been reinstated in service and the suspension period treated as leave period vide proceedings dated 30.06.2024; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ¶33

Pampana Vijaya Kumar Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 2nd respondent in continuing the petitioner under suspension as per charge memo in Rc. No.A2/167/2021 dated 18-3-2021 was bad, illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and of Articles 14, 16, 21, 25 and 300A of the Constitution of India, warranting setting aside of the suspension orders.

¶15

Court's answer

Upon recording the memo of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been reinstated in service and that the suspension period had been treated as leave period vide proceedings dated 30.06.2024, the Court found that no further orders were required to be passed in the Writ Petition and accordingly closed the Writ Petition, with no costs.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

As a sequel to the closure of the Writ Petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending therein shall stand closed.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.) closed Writ Petition No. 21369/2021 (decided 03.03.2026), filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by Pampana Vijaya Kumar, Senior Assistant (under suspension) in Sri M.S.N. Charities, Kakinada, who had challenged the action of the 2nd respondent in continuing him under suspension as per charge memo in Rc. No.A2/167/2021 dated 18-3-2021 as bad, illegal, arbitrary and violative of natural justice and of Articles 14, 16, 21, 25 and 300A of the Constitution, and had sought setting aside of the suspension orders. On the date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo stating that the petitioner had been reinstated in service and the suspension period had been treated as leave period vide proceedings dated 30.06.2024, and that no further orders were required. Recording the same, the Court closed the Writ Petition with no costs, and as a sequel miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending stood closed.

¶1

APHC010353192021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3329]

¶5

TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21369/2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

PAMPANA VIJAYA KUMAR, , S/O. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, SENIOR ASST. (UNDER SUSPENSION) IN SRI M.S.N. CHARITIES, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDOWMENTS) DEPT., SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶13

M S N CHARITIES, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS ASST. COMMISSIONER CUM EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶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 toto issue writ order or direction more particularly writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in continuing the petitioner under suspension as per charge memo in Rc. No.A2/167/2021 dated 18-3-2021 as bad, illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21, 25 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the suspension orders of the 2nd respondent vide charge memo in Rc. No.A2/167/2021 dated 18-3-2021

¶16

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

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 impugned charge memo dated 18-3-2021' only in regard to the suspension of the petitioner

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.D V SASIDHAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.T BALAJI

¶23

2.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

¶26

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 21369/2021

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo, wherein it is stated

¶30

that the petitioner was reinstated in the service. Thereafter, the suspension period was also treated as leave period vide proceedings dated 30.06.2024,

¶31

as such no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ Petition and

¶32

requested to close the Writ Petition.

¶33