Back
2024 Supreme(AP) 1384
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
B.Santosh and another – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No: 24867/2024
Decided On : 29-10-2024
For the Petitioner:
For the Petitioner: G V S Kishore Kumar
For the Respondent: GP For Services II
Mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings does not bar consideration for promotion, as established by G.O.Ms.No.257.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Petitioners sought to quash disciplinary charges and direct consideration for promotion to Deputy Executive Engineer - Court found that mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings does not bar promotion as per G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999. (Paras 1-5)
(B) Principles of Natural Justice - The court emphasized that promotions should be considered without reference to pending disciplinary actions, ensuring adherence to established rules and laws. (Paras 3-5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged the disciplinary charges issued against them and sought promotion, arguing that the ongoing proceedings should not impede their career advancement.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' promotion in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, disregarding the pending charges.
Issues: The main issue was whether the pendency of disciplinary proceedings could prevent the petitioners from being considered for promotion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the mere existence of disciplinary proceedings does not constitute a valid reason to deny promotion, aligning with the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.257.
Result: Writ petition disposed of in favor of the petitioners.
ORDER :
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:
“.... issue an order, proceeding, direction or an appropriate writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare and set aside/quash the article of charges Vide Proceeding No.B2/Vig& Enft/Rep-41/2022-2 dated 23.04.2024 issued by respondent No.3 for the works pertaining to 2017-2018 as the same is contrary to G.O.Ms. No.679, dated 01.11.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.91 dt.12.09.2022 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and it is consequently prayed to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer for the panel years 2013-14 to 2023-24 and to pass….”
2. Heard Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Service.
3. It is contended that because of pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, the respondent authorities are trying to deny the promotion of the petitioners. It is stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999, mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings or pendency of criminal case are not a bar for considering the case of the petitioners for promotion. He, therefore, prays for consideration of the case of the petitioners for promotion and direction may be given to the respondents to consider the case of petitioners in the light of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders in the light of G.O.Ms.No.257.
5. Considering the submissions made, it is apposite to dispose of the petition. In that view, writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for the promotion of Deputy Executive Engineer in the light of G.O.Ms.No.257 according to governing Rules and Law without reference to articles of charges dated 13.09.2023. No order as to costs.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
