ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the respondents without reviewing the petitioner’s suspension order dated 21.05.2022 passed by the 3rd respondent, even after lapse of 14 months contrary to G.O.Ms.No.86, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 08.03.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.91, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 12.09.2022, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to review the aforesaid suspension order forthwith by reinstating him into service by paying salary and allowances pending finalization of disciplinary proceedings.

2. The case of the petitioner is that while discharging the duties as Tahsildar, Devipatnam Mandal, he was placed under suspension by the orders issued by the 3rd respondent – District Collector dated 21.05.2022 on the

2 2 0 2 3 : A P H C : 3 1814 ground that he caused loss to the State Exchequer to a tune of Rs.2,24,55,000/- by duly recommending for the payment of compensation to ineligible fake D-patta holders under land acquisition for LMC-1 Polavaram Irrigation Project, as per the complaint given by one Mulla Malli Reddy and others. Even after lapse of 14 months, till date no enquiry officer has been appointed and no articles of charges are framed and also not reviewed the proceedings against the suspension order by the respondent authorities, which is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 08.03.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.01.2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the Land Acquisition Act, the Tashildar is not the concerned officer to the disbursement of compensation to the D-form patta holders and the petitioner has only given information to the Project Officer as per the proforma proceedings but has never recommended to pay the compensation and moreover he expressed his inability regarding the genuineness of details of D-form patta holders due to non- availability of records in the office. The 3rd respondent, 3 2 0 2 3 : A P H C : 3 1814 without conducting any enquiry, placed the petitioner under suspension and moreover, the co-delinquent officer i.e., Mandal Revenue Inspector who was suspended along with the petitioner has been reinstated into service pending enquiry. He finally prayed this Court to reinstate the petitioner into service pending finalization of disciplinary proceedings.

4. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has produced the copy of instructions of the 2nd respondent herein by Letter No.REV02-27/38/2023VIG I SEC-CCLA(C.No. 2000555), dated 20.08.2023, wherein it is stated that the Government has reviewed the representation made by the petitioner on 06.01.2023 and decided to continue the individual under suspension since the charges are serious in nature. Again, the petitioner has filed a representation on 28.06.2023, basing upon which the 3rd respondent has sent proposals not to consider the request of the petitioner as the charges are grave in nature.

5. The 2nd respondent has addressed a letter to the 1st respondent herein vide Letter No.REV02-27/38/2023VIG I

4 2 0 2 3 : A P H C : 3 1814 SEC-CCLA(C.No. 2000555), dated 20.08.2023 requesting for ratification and review of suspension order dated 21.05.2022 as the request made by the petitioner to the respondents to review the petitioner’s suspension dated

21.05.2022 under consideration before the 1st respondent.

6. Hence, there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposals sent by the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 21.08.2023 anr

5 2 0 2 3 : A P H C : 3 1814 HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRI