ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents not releasing Annual Grade Increments to the petitioner, which fall on due from 08.06.2017 to till date on mere pendency of Criminal Case in C.C.No.161/2018 (Old C.C.No.4/2017) on the file of Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Rajahmundry, without there being any order of punishment for withholding/postponing the same, as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and violative of F.R.24 and Regulation 32 of A.P.S.E.B as adopted by the APEPDCL, consequently direct the respondents herein to release the annual grade increments which fall on due from 08.06.2017 till date immediately to the petitioner, in terms of similar orders of this Court passed in W.P.No.5217 of 2019, dated 18.04.2019, W.P.No.13875 of 2020, dated 03.09.2020 and orders in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.14263 of 2020, dated 25.08.2020 and pass such other order..”

2. The facts of the case in brief are that, the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Engineer and subsequently got promoted as Deputy Executive Engineer (ADE) and presently working in the post of Deputy Executive Engineer. ACB registered a Trap Case against the petitioner, which initially numbered as C.C.No.4 of 2017 and transferred to Rajahmundry and renumbered as C.C.No.161 of 2018 is pending against the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner was suspended and subsequently reinstated into duty. The petitioner was reinstated into duty and presently working as Deputy Executive Engineer, Jaggampeta, East Godavari District, since the date of instatement, respondents herein and did not releasing his Annual Grade Increments as on today. The Division Bench in W.P.No.15165 of 2014 held that under F.R.24 the increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld. This Court in W.P.No.13875 of 2020 directed the respondents herein to release the Annual Grade Increments in case another employee of APEPDCL. Accordingly the respondents released increments to the petitioner therein, by implementing the orders of this Court. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to get his Annual Grade Increments from the date of his retirement, as there is no punishment is pending against him as on today to withhold the increments. Thus, the action of the respondents in not releasing the increments from the year 2017 till date as highly illegal, arbitrary and requested to issue a direction as stated above.

3. During hearing, Sri Ramalingeswara Rao Kocherlakota, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions raised in the affidavit, while placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in The Regional Deputy Director of Town Country Planning v. Sri Markonda Patnaikuni Janardhana Rao1 and requested to issue a direction in the same lines.

1 W.P.No.15509 of 2009 dated 16.04.2015

4. Whereas, Sri Metta Chandra Sekhar, learned Standing Counsel for APEPDCL appearing for the respondents opposed the Writ Petition on the ground that the charge memo and departmental proceedings are pending against this petitioner, though it is suspended it cannot be said to be closed and thereby, denial of increments during pendency of disciplinary proceedings is not an illegality and requested to pass appropriate orders.

5. As seen from the material on record, the order of suspension was revoked and the petitioner was reinstated into service by the third respondent vide proceedings dated 30.05.2017. However, articles of charges were served and the same is stayed by this Court in W.P.No.13434 of 2019 vide order dated 13.11.2019. Thus, as on the date, only disciplinary proceedings are deemed to be pending, despite granting stay by this Court.

6 Now, the question is whether the petitioner is entitled to claim service benefits like increments for the per