ORDER :

1. The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in extending the suspension period until further orders by way of impugned orders vide Cr. No. 948/2021/CSEB/B1-1, dated 27.10.2021 without serving currency of charge sheet for more than three months which is contrary to the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India and Another, 2015 (2) SCR 415 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner forthwith into the services and pass such order or orders......”

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Inspector of Special Enforcement Bureau in Andhra Pradesh Excise Department on 01.11.2007. While so, on 27.03.2021, a case in F.I.R. No. 04/RCT-OGL/2021 of ACB Police Station, Ongole, Prakasam District, was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018. Thereafter, vide proceedings dated 01.04.2021, the 2nd respondent herein in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (2) (a) of Rule 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CC&A) Rules, 1991, placed the petitioner under suspension with effect from 28.03.2021 i.e. the date of his remand to judicial custody and directed that the petitioner shall continue to be under suspension in the public interest till the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings/termination of all the proceedings relating to the criminal charges.

3. Pending the writ petition, the 2nd respondent vide orders dated 27.10.2021, has extended the suspension period of the petitioner until further orders. Thereafter, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 1 of 2022 seeking amendment of the prayer challenging the subsequent order dated 27.10.2021 passed by the 2nd respondent, wherein the 2nd respondent has extended the suspension period until further orders, which was allowed by this Court on 20.04.2022.

4. The 2nd respondent filed counter stating that the petitioner was involved in ACB trap case and as such, he was placed under suspension with effect from 28.03.2021. The Government vide G.O.Ms. No. 86, GA (Ser-C) Department, dated 08.03.1994 with regard to suspension orders issued the following guidelines against the Government Servants:

(i) The order of suspension against a Government Servant shall be reviewed at the end of six months.

(ii) The appropriate reviewing authority should take decision regarding continuance or otherwise of the employee concerned under suspension, with reference to the nature of charges, where delays in finalization of enquiry proceedings cannot be attributed to the employee or when there is no interference from the employee in facilitating the enquiry.

(iii) An outer limit be provided as two years from the date of suspension, failing which public servant may have to be reinstated without prejudice to the proceedings being perused. However, in exceptional cases, considering the gravity of the charges, one could be continued under suspension even beyond a period of two years, especially in cases where there is deliberate delay caused due to non-co-operation of the employee concerned.

(iv) The concerned Principal Secretary/Secretary in the Department should review the suspension cases of their department at an interval of six months with the representative of ACB, if the proceedings arose of the investigations conducted by the ACB and make suitable recommendations as to the desirability or otherwise recommendations continuance of the officers under suspension.

As per the counter of the 2nd respondent, in the light of the above Government instructions, the petitioner’s suspension period