Ponnada Ammaji Rao Vs the State of Ap

PONNADA AMMAJI RAO, S/O BHADRACHALAM, AGE 62 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS AN ASSISTANT TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, AT VMRDA, VISAKHAPATNAM IN THE CADRE OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR/ ASSISTANT CITY ...PETITIONERPLANNER.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (VIG-I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

THE DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, , REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MGM CAPITAL, GROUND FLOOR, NRI HOSPITAL, JUNCTION, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMRAVATI.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

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 toleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly

¶18

2

¶19

one in the nature in WRIT of MANDAMUS aggrieved by the action of the Respondent in not considering Petitioners case for promotion for the post of Deputy Director/ Deputy City Planner at 2nd Respondent Directorate of Town and Country Planning basing on unserving and non communicated Departmental Proceedings vide G.O.RT.No 724 Dated 25.07.2025 of Municipal Administration and Urban Development (VIG.I) Department which is highly illegal, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law and violations of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith consider Petitioners case for promotion to next level cadre post of Deputy Director/ Deputy City Planner as per GO Ms No 66 General Administration (SER.C) Director Dated 30.1.1991 and as per law without referring the unserving and non communicated Departmental proceedings vide G.O.RT.No 724 dated 25.07.2025 of 1st 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 pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith consider Petitioner’s case for promotion to next level cadre post of Deputy Director/ Deputy City Planner as per GO Ms No 66 General Administration (SER.C) Director Dated 30.1.1991 and as per law without referring the unserving and non communicated Departmental proceedings vide G.O.RT.No 724 dated 25.07.2025 of 1st Respondent and to pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.S SRINIVASA RAO

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 2^nd

¶29

respondent in not considering the petitioner’s case for promotion for the post of

¶30

3

¶31

Deputy Director/Deputy City Planner at 2^nd respondent Directorate of Town & Country Planning basing on G.O.Ms.No.66 General Administration (SER-C) Director Dated 30.01.1991.is highly illegal, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law and violations of Principles of Natural Justice and contrary Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith consider the Petitioner's case of promotion to the next level cadre post of Assistant Director/ Assistant City Planner without referring the Common Disciplinary Proceedings in G.O.Rt.No 326 Dated 21.04.2026 of Municipal Administration and Urban Development(Vig.lll) Department and as per GO Ms No 66 General Administration (SERVICES-C) Director, Dated 30.1.1991 and as per law.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶33

The petitioner, who is working as an Assistant Planning Officer, VMRDA, Visakhapatnam in the cadre of Assistant Director/Assistant City Planner as a Town Planning Officer. While things stood thus, the 1^st respondent has been subjected to departmental proceedings as per the impugned G.O.Rt.No.724 dated 25.07.2025 issued by the Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department. These proceedings relate to allegations arising from a surprise check conducted at the Town Planning Section, Zone-VII, Anakapalle GVMC. The disciplinary proceedings were initiated in the year 2025, but so far the

¶34

4

¶35

Articles of Charges have not been served or communicated to the petitioner so far. It is contended that the petitioner is due for promotion; however, the respondents are not considering the petitioner's case, as disciplinary proceedings are pending.

¶36

It is stated that, placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.66 dated 30-01-1991, the disciplinary proceedings are deemed to be pending only after the charges are framed against the employee. It is further contended that mere initiation of the disciplinary proceedings would not amount to actual commencement of the disciplinary proceedings. Placing reliance on the said G.O.Ms.No.66, the petitioner seeks consideration of his case for promotion.

¶37

The learned counsel for the petitioner further places reliance on the decision of the coordinate Bench in W.P.No.17683 of 2025 prays for passing of the similar order in the present case also.

¶38

Considered the submissions and having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission.

¶39

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Director/Deputy City Planner at 2^nd respondent Directorate of Town &

¶40

5

¶41

Country Planning basing on G.O.Ms.No.66 General Administration (SER-C) Director Dated 30.01.1991. There shall be no order as to costs

¶42

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

¶43

_____________

¶44

D. RAMESH,J

¶45

Date:02.03.2026