THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.31570 OF 2017

ORDER:

The present writ petition is filed to declare the action of the 4^th respondent in not promoting the petitioner to the category of Forest Section Officer during the panel year 2015-2016 on or after 26.12.2015, subsequent to the expiry of currency/effect of punishment owing to modified orders issued in Proc. No. 2169/2011/S2/S3 dated 05.10.2015. subsequent to the expiry of currency/effect of punishment owing to modified orders issued in Proc. No. 2169/2011/S2/S3 dated 05.10.2015 in lieu of orders made in Proceedings No. 2740(i)/2011/S6 dated 26.12.2013 issued at the first instance is in violation to Government in Cir. Memo No. 34633/Ser.C/99, G.A. (Ser.C) Dept., dated 04-11-1999 and the sub-

rule (b) of F.R. 29-A, as arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri N. Sharath Chandra Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri Arvind Kumar Kata, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents, and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as a Forest Beat Officer (FBO), under the control of the 6^th respondent and the petitioner had been expecting promotion to the category of Forest Section Officer (FSO) during the panel year 2016-17 based on his seniority and eligibility in the category of FBO as on 01.01.2016 in the unit of Nalgonda Division.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner had completed more than 27 years of service and as per the "seniority list of FBOs of Nalgonda Unit as on 01.01.2015 and

01.01.2016", the petitioner stood at serial No. 1 in both the lists.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, earlier to the panel year 2013, the petitioner had not been promoted to the category of FSO, owing to the pending of disciplinary case initiated against him vide Article of Charge (AOC) in Ref. No. 2740/S6/2011 dated 29-07-2011. Subsequently, the disciplinary case has been disposed of by the disciplinary authority vide Ref. No. 2740(i)/2011/S6 dated 26.12.2013 by imposing punishment of "stoppage of one annual grade increment with cumulative effect". Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the petitioner submitted an appeal petition dated 23.05.2014 to the 3^rd respondent (appellate authority) and the 3^rd respondent issued proceedings in Rc.No.1406/2014/M3, dated 10.10.2014 by remitting back the case to the disciplinary authority, by setting aside the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after remitting back the disciplinary case to the disciplinary authority, the disciplinary authority had now issued proceedings, dated 05.10.2015 imposing the punishment of “stoppage of two annual grade increments without cumulative effect”.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the Circular Memo No.34633/Ser.C/99, Genl.Admn.(Ser.C) Department, dated

04.11.1999, wherein it is stated as follows:

“where the penalty of stoppage of increments with or without cumulative effect is imposed, under Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, the increment or increments falling due immediately after the date of issue of the order should be withheld. It is also clarified that the employee whose increments were withheld shall not be recommended for promotion during the period for which the increments were ordered to be withheld with effect from the date of issue of the order imposing the penalty.”

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in that view of the Government orders, it should be construed that the punishment of "stoppage of two annual grade increments without cumulative effect" in Proceedings dated 05.10.2015 is in lieu of punishment imposed in Proceedings dated 26.12.2013 and the petitioner’s increment which falls due immediately on or after January, 2014, sh