Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/24300/2026 of C JEEVAN KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 9 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 24300/2026 Between: C Jeevan Kumar ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
APHC010445982026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 24300/2026
Between:
C Jeevan Kumar
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.24300 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the orders of suspension, dated 21.08.2026 of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The petitioner is working as Deputy Tahsildar in the office of the Tahsildar, Thottambedu, Tirupati District. While so, a audio clip in connection with an extent of Ac.0.09 cents with regard to illegal gratification of Rs.3,00,000/- and other allegations, was being circulated, containing the voice of the petitioner along with others. On the basis of said audio clip, the petitioner was placed under suspension. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that a hearing of the audio clip does not disclose any unpalatable language used by the petitioner vis-à-vis the senior officials of the Government and that the impugned order of suspension was passed as a linear reaction without considering this aspect.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that there are serious allegations against the words raised by the petitioner and that the audio clip circulated on social media necessitates keeping the petitioner under suspension. It is further submits that a detailed Charge Memorandum was also issued to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsels.
6. The issue of whether unpalatable language was used by the petitioner in the audio clip, which is the basis for passing the impugned order, is a factual issue which can be examined by the Respondent Authorities by taking into account the explanation of the petitioner.
7. In view of the above submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following direction:-
(i) The Respondents authorities are directed to consider the explanation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders with regard to the continuance of suspension of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicated the same to the Petitioner.
(ii) There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 10.09.2026
mmk/eha
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.24300 of 2026 Dt: 10.09.2026
mmk/eha