Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
D Mallikarjuna vs The State Of Ap on 28 December, 2024
APHC010591452024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331]
SATURDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 30874/2024
Between:
1. D MALLIKARJUNA, S/O LATE ANJANEYULU, AGE 61 YEARS,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS TOWN PLANNING OFFICER ON OWN
PAY ACP, AT GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (VIG-I)
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI,
AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DIRECTORATE OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, 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
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more
particularly one in the nature in WRIT of MANDAMUS aggrieved by the action
of the Respondent in not considering Petitioners case for promotion to the
post of Assistant Director Assistant Commissioner of Planning at 2nd
Respondent Directorate of Town and Country Planning which is highly illegal,
2
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 the next level cadre post of Assistant Director/ Assistant
Commissioner of Planning as per GO Ms No 257 General Administration
(SER.C) Director Dated 10.6.1999 and as per law without referring the
pending Departmental proceedings vide Charge Memo No 3264/2011/Cl
Dated 18.10.2011 2nd Respondent and to pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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
direct the 2nd Respondent to consider Petitioner's case for promotion to the
next level cadre post of Assistant Director/ Assistant Commissioner of
Planning as per GO Ms No 257 General Planning as per Administration
(SER.C) Director Dated 10.6.1999 and as per law without referring the
pending Departmental proceedings vide Charge Memo No 3264/2011/Cl
Dated 18.10.2011 2ndOf Respondent and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. S SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV
The Court made the following:
:: ORDER ::
Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S.Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appearing for respondents.
2. The petitioner, Town Planning Officer, Guntur, filed the above writ petition. Aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering his case for promotion to the post of Assistant Director/Assistant Commissioner of Planning due to the pendency of charge memo vide Roc.No.3264/2011/C1, dated 18.10.2011 (Ex.P.1), as illegal and arbitrary.
33. A charge memo vide Roc.No.3264/2011/C1, dated 18.10.2011 (Ex.P.1) was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a written defence on 06.10.2012 (Ex.P.2). Despite submitting the written defence, the inquiry is not completed so far.
4. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, G.O.Ms.No.679 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 01.11.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 12.09.2022, fixing timelines to complete the enquiry for simple cases three months and for complicated cases six months respectively.
5. In the case at hand, as seen from Ex.P.1 and 2, the charge memo was issued in October 2011, and the petitioner submitted a written defence in October 2012. However, despite the timelines, the inquiry has not been concluded so far. Thus, the respondents failed to adhere to the government orders issued.
8. In State of Punjab and Others v. Chaman Lal Goyal 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as follows:
"......At the same time, it is directed that the respondent should be considered forthwith for promotion without reference to and without taking into consideration the charges or the pendency of the said enquiry and if he is found fit for promotion, he should be promoted immediately."
9. In The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and another v. A.Rajeswara Reddy, Deputy Collector2, the Division Bench of Composite High Court observed as follows:
1(1995) 2 Supreme Court Cases 570 2 2010 (4) ALT 374 4 ".....Since the petitioners did not complete the departmental proceedings against the respondent even after lapse of more than one and half years, the Tribunal has rightly directed consideration of the case of the respondent for promotion without reference to the pending disciplinary proceedings, and no interference is called for with the said order."
10. Ordinarily, an employee will not be considered for promotion if disciplinary proceedings are initiated against him based on serious allegations. However, an employee cannot be denied promotion by keeping the disciplinary proceedings pending for unduly long periods. The delay on the part of the respondent authorities in concluding the inquiry in terms of G.O.Ms.Nos.679 dated 01.11.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022, the petitioner shall not be penalized.
11. Given the discussion supra, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Assistant Director/Assistant Commissioner of Planning in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. The 2nd respondent shall conclude the inquiry in terms of G.O.Ms.No.91 General Administration (Services-C) Department dated 12.09.2022. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 28.12.2024 SNI 5 87 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.30874 of 2024 Dated: 28.12.2024 SNI