Arun Kumar Pandu Syamala v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayer:

"To issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the impugned action of the respondents herein in initiating the enquiry against this petitioner in pursuance of anonymous and pseudonymous letters without following the due process and procedure contemplated under U.O. note No. 10674/L&O- 1/A1/2000-04 dated 30.12.2000, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to conduct enquiry".

2. Today, when the matter is taken up, written instructions vide Memo No.118/SC.D/A1/2015-1 dated 14.7.2015 furnished by the Secretary to Government (Poll), GAD have been placed on record by the learned Government Pleader. Paragraph 6 of the said instructions read as under: "The Special Government Pleader for Services, High Court is therefore informed that the credentials of the petitioners were verified by the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau and reported his findings in the matter, as such the complaints filed against the petitioner viz., Sri S.Arun Kumar Pandu are not anonymous and pseudonymous as contended. It is further informed that, the Government has not yet finalized its decision on the recommendations of the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau for conducting the CBCID enquiry. Hence, filing of Writ Petition by the petitioner in the matter before the Hon'ble'ble High Court is pre-mature".

3. In view of the above instructions stating that the Government has not yet finalized its decision on the recommendations of the Director General, Anti Corruption Bureau for conducting CBCID enquiry, this Court is of the view that there is no need to adjudicate the matter now. However, it is made clear that before finalizing the decision, if any, as mentioned supra,

the respondents shall act in accordance with law.

4. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The petitioner is entitled to avail appropriate remedies if he is aggrieved by any actions in future. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J Date: 16.7.2014 DA

16.7.2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT HYDERABAD Date: 16.7.2014 Between:

Arun Kumar Pandu Syamala .. Petitioner And State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

.. Respondents