THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.24466 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:

“...in view of the fact that, although the Petitioner was suspended by Respondent No.2 vide Procs. No.579/V/2024-II, dt. 23/03/2024, no charge sheet or charge memo pertaining to Cr. No.07/RCT-CR-2/2024, dt. 21/03/2024, has been issued to the Petitioner till date, it is prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction, particularly one in the nature of mandamus, declaring that the action of Respondent No.2 in continuing the suspension of the Petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in Ajay Kumar Chowdhary vs Union of India, 2015 (7) SCC 291, as well as violative of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to direct Respondent No.2 to reinstate the Petitioner into service with immediate effect...”

3. Heard Sri Ch.Mani Charan, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner was working as Senior Technical Assistant in the Office of District Legal Metrology Officer, Ranga Reddy, a case in Crime No.07/RCT-CR-2/2024 dated 21.03.2024 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.2 vide Memo dated 23.03.2024. 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, the respondents are 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 so far. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court that appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition directing the respondents to review the suspension order, dated 23.03.2024, within a reasonable period of time.

5. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents order, dated 23.03.2024, 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

23.03.2024, 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