Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Patti Satya Sreenivasulu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 431 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 431 AP
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Patti Satya Sreenivasulu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 29 January, 2021
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

                 WRIT PETITION No.21287 OF 2020

ORDER:-


       This Writ Petition is filed under           Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

      "......pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
      more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus,
      declaring the action of the respondents in not reinstating the

petitioner to the Post of Deputy Tahsildhar in pursuance to the suspension order issued by the 2nd respondent in REV- ASECODPA/54/2019-SA(A1)-COLLKRNL, dated 09.09.2019 basing on the F.I.R.No.09/RCA-KUR/2019, dated 31.08.2019 U/s.13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 booked against the petitioner even though there is inordinate delay in concluding disciplinary proceedings and no charge sheet is filed in the aforesaid crime and petitioner is entitled to reinstated in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudary Vs Union of India reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291 as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to the Post of Deputy Tahsildhar without reference to aforesaid disciplinary proceedings and crime pending against the petitioner and pass....."

2. Heard Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for the

petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I

appearing for the respondents.

3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that he was placed

under suspension by an order, dated 9.9.2019, basing on a crime

in F.I.R.No.09/RCA-KUR/2019, dated 31.08.2019 for the offence

punishable under Section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption

(Amendment) Act, 2018 but till date, no charge sheet is filed in the

above crime or no disciplinary enquiry is initiated against this

petitioner thereby, he cannot be continued under suspension in

terms of the judgment in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of

India through its Secretary and another1 and thereby, the

inaction of the respondents in reinstating the petitioner is illegal

and requested to issue a direction.

4. During hearing, Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel

for the petitioner, submitted that a review meeting is likely to take

place in the month of February, 2021 and requested to direct the

review committee to take into consideration the judgment in Ajay

Kumar Choudhary's case (1 referred supra) and pass appropriate

orders during review.

5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the

respondents contended that the judgment of the Apex Court in

Union of India and another vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal2 is

contrary to the principles laid down in Ajay Kumar Choudhary's

case (1 referred supra). In any view of the matter, he reported no

objection to consider the case of the petitioner keeping in view the

law laid down by the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary's case

(1 referred supra).

6. In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel

for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I

conceded to consider the request made by the petitioner in the

review meeting likely to be held in the month of February keeping

in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar

Choudhary's case (1 referred supra).

(2015) 7 SCC 291

(2013) 16 SCC 147

7. Recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader

for Services-I appearing for the respondents, I find that it would be

suffice to issue a direction to the respondents to consider the case

of this petitioner in the review committee meeting likely to be held

in the month of February, 2021 keeping in view the law laid down

by the Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary's case (1 referred

supra).

8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of at

the stage of admission with the consent of both the parties. There

shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition

shall stand closed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date : 29.1.2021 AMD

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION No.21287 OF 2020

Date : 29.01.2021

AMD

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter