Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Unknown vs High Court Of Andhra Pradesh At ... on 6 April, 2026

       HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: W.P.No.7817 of 2026

                            PROCEEDING SHEET

                                                                             OFFICE
Sl.     DATE                              ORDER                               NOTE
No
02.   06.04.2026   DR, J

                           The contention of learned counsel for the
                   petitioner is that the case of the petitioner was
                   not    considered    for   promotion    in    view   of
                   pendency        of     disciplinary     proceedings.
                   Thereafter, based on the directions issued by
                   this    Court   in   W.P.No.4053       of    2025    on
                   17.02.2025, the respondents have concluded the

disciplinary proceedings and final orders have been passed on 19.01.2026 awarding 'censure'. In view of the orders dated 19.01.2026, the petitioner is deprived of a chance for promotion to the post of Deputy District Education and Mass Media Officer. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly placed his reliance on the orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court in A.Vema Reddy v. Controller General of Defence Accounts, New Delhi (2001 (5) ALD 131 (DB)) and also the orders passed by a Coordinate of this Court in W.P.No.19390 of 2020, wherein the Court has categorically held that the censure is a minor punishment something like a warning to be careful in future and in that a lenient view was (contd..) taken to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to improve his behaviour and to be careful in his work in future. Further, this Court has also considered the judgment of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in K.Madhavan v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Cochin (1983 (1) SLJ 240), wherein the Court has observed that 'censure' inflicted as a regular penalty in proceedings taken under the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules cannot have the effect of automatically postponing the employee's promotion and cannot be prevented the promotion.

Considering the observations made by the Division Bench as well as Coordinate Bench of this Court, there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy District Education and Mass Media Officer without reference to the punishment order dated 19.01.2026.

List the matter after four (4) weeks.

________ DR, J Ivd