Ch.Raghunatha Rao, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K.VIJAYA LAKSHMI WRIT PETITION No.32546 of 2017 Date:22.9.2017 Between:

Ch.Raghunatha Rao, S/o Ch. LIngaiah ..... Petitioner And:

The State of A.P., reptd by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (Vig.II) Department, Guntur District and another.

....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. M.V.S.Sai Kumar Counsel for the respondents: GP for Services (AP) The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & KVL, J WP.No.32546 of 2017 Dated:22.9.2017 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) Feeling aggrieved by order, dated 17.8.2017, in Original Application No.2396 of 2017 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal'), the applicant therein has filed this Writ Petition. The grievance with which the petitioner filed the aforementioned O.A. before the Tribunal was that though a charge memo was issued as far back as 08.9.2016, the respondents have not concluded the inquiry and that, on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the respondents are not considering his case for promotion to the post of Town Planning Officer. The Tribunal dismissed the said O.A. on the ground that the respondents cannot be hustled to consider the petitioner's case for promotion.

Learned Government Pleader for Services (Andhra Pradesh) has submitted that the petitioner's case has not so far been rejected for promotion and that, his case will be considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, 'D.P.C.') strictly in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999.

In the light of the above submission of the learned Government Pleader, the order of the Tribunal is set aside. The

CVNR, J & KVL, J WP.No.32546 of 2017 Dated:22.9.2017 respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Town Planning Officer in the light of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999, take a decision and communicate the same to the petitioner immediately thereafter. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondents, he shall be free to avail appropriate legal remedies. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, WPMP.No.40490 of 2017 is disposed of as infructuous.

__________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY ________________________ ` JUSTICE K.VIJAYA LAKSHMI 22nd September 2017 DR