A Hima Bindu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

A HIMA BINDU, W/O A.HANUMANTHA REDDY, AGED 46 YEARS, OCC. PROHIBITION AND EXCISE INSPECTOR, WORKING AT SHO MOLAKALACHERUVU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, FORMALLY CHITTOR DISTRICT. R/O. 10-1220, KK NILAYAM BACK SIDE, NAYANICHERUVU PALLI POST, MOLAKALACHERUVU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, FORMALLY CHITTOR DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, AP, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶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 to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the impugned proceedings Cr.No.12027/69/2025/B4 Dated.08.10.2025 on the file of the 2^nd

¶16

2

¶17

respondent whereby placing the petitioner under suspension from service on the allegation that I failed to monitor the decreasing sale of affordable liquor in A4 shops and did not secure adequate intelligence report to prevent a major offences in jurisdiction of SHO Molakalacheruvu as illegal, arbitrary, without any tangible evidence and material, violation of Principals of Natural Justice, selective, discrimination and against the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate petitioner in to service with all consequential benefits and to pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶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 reinstate the petitioner in to service by suspending the impugned proceedings Cr.No.l2027/69/2025/B4 Dated:08.10.2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent and to pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶21

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 May be pleased to vacate the Interim Orders passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.34818 of 2025 dated 17.12.2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.HARINATH REDDY SOMAGUTTA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

3

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The present Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the

¶30

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶31

“to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the impugned proceedings Cr.No.12027/69/2025/B4 Dated.08.10.2025 on the file of the 2^nd respondent whereby placing the petitioner under suspension from service on the allegation that I failed to monitor the decreasing sale of affordable liquor in A4 shops and did not secure adequate intelligence report to prevent a major offences in jurisdiction of SHO Molakalacheruvu as illegal, arbitrary, without any tangible evidence and material, violation of Principals of Natural Justice, selective, discrimination and against the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate petitioner in to service with all consequential benefits and to pass….”

¶32

Heard Mr. S.Harinathreddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned proceedings vide Cr.No.12027/69/2025/B4 dated 08.10.2025 were issued by respondent no.2 placing the petitioner under suspension from service on the allegation that the petitioner failed to monitor the decreasing sale of affordable liquor in A4 shops and did not secure adequate intelligence report to prevent a major offence in jurisdiction of S.H.O, Molakalacheruvu.

¶33

Considering the submissions and on perusal of the record, this Court has passed an interim order on 17.12.2025 which reads as follows:

¶34

4

¶35

“…Therefore, there shall be an interim direction to the respondent authorities with the following directions:

¶36

i) The impugned order of suspension dated 08.10.2025 issued vide Cr.No.12027/69/2025/B4 is suspended. ii) The respondent authorities are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service pending further orders.”

¶37

Immediately, the respondents have filed counter and vacate stay petition.

¶38

Considering the time gap, as the suspension is of 08.10.2025 and the interim order of this Court is on 17.12.2025 and now we are in April, 2026. In fact as per the general instructions issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 29.02.2024, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing

¶39

the respondents to review the suspension orders in terms of the above said G.O and pass appropriate orders within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶40

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in the writ petition, shall also stand closed.

¶41

__________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶42

21.4.2026 RD

¶43

5

¶44

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶45

WRIT PETITION No.34818 OF 2025