Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/17743/2026 of B.LAKSHMI DEVI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 2 July 2026
for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : APHC010336792026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 17743/2026 Between: 1.
Date of reserved for orders :
Date of pronouncement :
Date of uploading :
APHC010336792026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 17743/2026
Between:
1. B.LAKSHMI DEVI, W/O. I. ANJA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 52
YEARS,OCC PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (PDO), FORMERLY
PANCHAYAT
SECRETARY
GRADE-1,
PENUGALURU MANDAL,RAYACOTY ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT...
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATI.522238
2. THE
COMMISSIONER,
PANCHAYAT
RAJ
AND
RURAL
DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT,
TADEPALLI,
GUNTUR
DISTRICT, 522501
3. THE
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR,
ANNAMAYYA
DISTRICT,
RAYACHOTY.
4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTY.
...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 the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO) solely on account of the pendency of Charge Memo No. 2371-457/CPR and RD/B2/2024, dated 18.08.2024, as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and contrary to G.O. Ms. No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, as well as G.O. Ms. No.91, General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 12.09.2022, and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO) without reference to Charge Memo No. 2371-457/CPR and RD/B2/2024, dated 18.08.2024, in terms of G.O. Ms. No.257 dated 10.06.1999, 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 the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO)
without
reference
to
Charge
MemoNo.
457/CPR&RD/B2/2024, dated 18.08.2024, in terms of G.O. Ms. No.257
dated 10.06.1999, and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K R SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION No.17743 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:
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondents in not promoting the Petitioner to the post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO) on account of pendency of departmental enquiry, which arose out of the charge memo issued vide Charge Memo No.2371- 457/CRP&RD/B2/2024, dated 18.08.2024, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The Petitioner while working as Panchayat Secretary Grade-I, Nallapuraddipalli Gram Panchayat, Penagaluru Mandal was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 27.05.2024. Subsequently, a charge memo dated 18.08.2024 was issued alleging certain misconduct.
3. It is stated that after serving the above charge memo, the Petitioner submitted her explanation on 17.09.2024 refuting the aforesaid charge and enquiry is stated to be pending. While so, the promotion for the post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO) is being considered and the apprehension of the Petitioner is that her case would not be considered for promotion in view of the pendency of the disciplinary enquiry. It was in that context, the present Writ Petition was filed.
4. Having heard the respective submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the Petitioner for the post of Panchayat
Development Officer (MPDO) can be considered for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999.
5. The Writ Petition is disposed of with following directions:- i) The Respondents are directed to consider the Petitioner’s case for promotion to the Post of Panchayat Development Officer (MPDO) subject to the Petitioner possessing requisite qualifications in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999.
ii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Date: 03.07.2026 KLP Whether the order is: Speaking
Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable