Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/18222/2026 of S. Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 14 July 2026
for orders : --- Date of pronouncement : 15.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010322582026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18222/2026
Date of reserved for orders
: ---
Date of pronouncement
: 15.07.2026
Date of uploading
:
APHC010322582026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 18222/2026
Between:
1. S. NAGESWARA RAO, S/O LATE MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62
YEARS, RETD. D.S.P, RIO H.NO. 3-2-476/A-1, CHAPPAL
BAZAR, KACHIGUDA, HYDERABAD - 500 023.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS CHIEF
SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 238.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, TRANSPORT (R AND B) DEPARTMENT, A.P.
SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 238.
3. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R
ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK, 3RD FLOOR, PANDIT NEHRU BUS
STATION, ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 520013
4. THE
CHIEF
COMMISSIONER,
O/O.A.P
INFORMATION
COMMISSION, MGM CAPITAL, SERVICE ROAD, CHINNA
KAKANI, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P-522503.
5. SRI ADIMULA M MOHAN, S/O A. SUBBA RATNAM, AGE 60
YEARS,
DEPUTY
TRANSPORT
COMMISSIONER,
O/O
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AT
VIJAYAWADA, A.P., R/O H.NO. 18-4-55, FLAT NO. 501, SAI
SURYA
ENCLAVE,
2ND
LINE,
KEDARESWARAPET,
VIJAYAWADA'(ALT PLOT NO. 521,102/1 OF SHAIKPET, ROAD
NO. 86, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD - 33). 520003
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the 5th respondent, despite repeated representations submitted by the petitioner before the competent authorities and the continued inaction of the respondents in keeping the disciplinary proceedings pending for an indefinite period is highly arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the statutory mandate prescribed under Rule 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classificatio n, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, as amended from time to time, and also contrary to the guidelines and timelines prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.41, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 18.04.2021 and violative of Articles 14 and 21
of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to ensure that the disciplinary proceedings against the 5th respondent is to be concluded prior to the date of his superannuation on 31-07-2026, in accordance with the timelines prescribed under G.O.Ms.No. 91, G.A. (Ser.C) Department, dated 12-09-2022, and G.O.Ms.No. 41, G.A. (Ser.C) Department, dated 18-04-2021 and Pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to consider representation dated 24.02.2026 and Pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. THOKA HARSHA SAI PAVAN YADAV
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS
2. GP FOR SERVICES I
3. KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU( SC FOR AP INFORMATION
COMMISSION)
4. GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court made the following:
WRIT PETITION No.18222 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:
1. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with a request to grant liberty to the Petitioner to challenge the impugned proceedings before the appropriate forum.
2. Permission is accorded.
3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the Petitioner to challenge the impugned proceedings before the appropriate forum.
4. No order as to costs.
5. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Date: 15.07.2026 chs Whether the order is: Speaking ✔ Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable ✔
WRIT PETITION No.18222 of 2026 Dated: 15.07.2026
chs