THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.24484 OF 2025

O R D E R:

With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus aggrieved by the action of the Respondent’s in continuing the petitioner under suspension without reviewing the same pursuant to the impugned memo No. SE/OP/HBG/DE(T)/PO/JAO/ADM/F.38/D.No.629 dated 05.03.2024 being arbitrary, illegal and in contrary to the orders issued in G.O.Ms No.86 General Administration (Services-C) department dated 08-03- 1994 and in violation of article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direction may be given to the respondents to review the suspension order dated 05-03-2024 and reinstate the petitioner in to service with benefits incidental thereto...”

3. Heard Sri S.Chandra Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for respondent No.1; and Sri P.Shankar Rao, learned counsel representing Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited, 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was working as Junior Accounts Officer in respondent No.5-office, a case in Crime No.04/RCT-CR-2/2024 dated 01.03.2024 on the file of Anti-Corruption Bureau, City Range-2, Hyderabad, was registered against the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner was placed under suspension by respondent No.5 vide Memo dated 05.03.2024. It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, (2015) 7 Supreme Court Case 291, has categorically held that a suspension order should not be extended beyond three months if, within this period, the memorandum of charges/charge sheet is not served on the delinquent officer/employee and as per G.O.Ms.No.86 General Administration (Services.C) Department, dated 08.03.1994, respondent No.5 is bound to review the suspension order of the petitioner at the end of every six months. However, neither the memorandum of charges/charge sheet has been filed nor the suspension order has been reviewed since the date of its issuance. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court that appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition directing respondent No.5 to review the suspension order, dated 05.03.2024, within a reasonable period of time.

5 fairly submits that respondent No.5 will review the suspension order, dated 05.03.2024, in accordance with law.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of

directing respondent No.5 to review the suspension order, dated 05.03.2024, issued to the petitioner, strictly in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary’s case and in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.86, dated 08.03.1994, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________

PULLA KARTHIK, J Date : 19.08.2025.

TMK