Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/16363/2026 of K. Karna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 23 June 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 16363/2026 Between: 1. K. KARNA, S/O. K. SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
APHC010312862026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 16363/2026
Between:
1. K. KARNA, S/O. K. SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 49
YEARS, OCC. PROHIBITION AND EXCISE INSPECTOR, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE STATION, PIDUGURALLA, PALNADU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
REVENUE
(EXCISE)
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
AMARAVATI, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522238
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR
DISTRICT,
ANDHRA
PRADESH -522503
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND
EXCISE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522002
...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 an appropriate order or directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's claim for promotion to the post of Assistant Prohibition
and
Excise
Superintendent
without
reference to the Charge Memo vide proceedings CR
No.4961/2019/CPE/B3-10 dated 04- 11-2019 and also Charge Memo vide File No. Rev 04-11030/9/2020-A SEC- COPE dated 12-04-2020 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent in the ensuing promotions for the panel year 2025-26 without reference to the charge memo vide proceedings CR No.4961/2019/CPE/B3-10 dated 04-11- 2019
and also Charge Memo vide File No. Rev 04-11030/9/2020-A
SEC- COPE dated 12-04-2020,
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 petitioner for promotion as Assistant Prohibition & Excise Superintendent in the ensuing promotions for the panel year 2025-26 without reference to the charge memo vide proceedings CR NO.4961/2019/CPE/B3-10
dated 04-11-2019 and also Charge Memo vide File No. Rev 04- 11030/9/2020-A SEC-COPE dated 12-04-2020,pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.16363 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.
O R D E R:
1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not considering the claim of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, without reference to the charge memorandum issued vide Cr.No.4961/2019/CPE/B3-10, dated 04.11.2019 and charge memorandum issued vide File.No.Rev.04- 11030/9/2020-ASEC-COPE, dated 12.04.2020, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The Petitioner is working as a prohibition and Excise Inspector. While so, a charge memorandum was issued against the Petitioner and articles of charge were framed against the Petitioner under Rule No.20 of Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991, vide Cr.No.4961/2019/CPE/B3-10, dated 04.11.2019. The said article of charge was framed, alleging that the Petitioner had disobeyed the orders of his superiors by not joining at the new place of posting during general transfers. In the aforesaid charge memorandum, no witnesses were mentioned to support the article of charge. Thereafter, the Petitioner had given his explanation and no further action was taken thereon.
3. Thereafter, another charge memorandum was issued to the Petitioner vide File.No.Rev.04-11030/9/2020-ASEC-COPE, dated 12.04.2020, wherein two articles of charge were framed against the Petitioner. The Article of Charge – I alleged that the Petitioner being a disciplined uniformed Government servant had failed to control the stocks in retail outlets in his jurisdiction during lock-down period, resulting in missing of stocks in retail outlets. The Article of Charge – II alleged that the Petitioner had failed to control his subordinate staff in his station, resulting in theft of liquor stocks by a P & E constable.
4. Thereafter, an enquiry officer was appointed to enquire into the 2nd charge memorandum issued against the Petitioner and an enquiry report was submitted stating that the articles of charge framed against the Petitioner were not proved. The grievance of the Petitioner now is that, on account of pendency of disciplinary enquiry, the promotion of the Petitioner to the post of Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent is not being considered. Hence, the Writ Petition is filed.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent would be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999 and an appropriate decision will be taken in that regard.
6. Heard the counsels.
7. The article of charge/charge memorandum issued against the Petitioner on 04.11.2019 with regard to his non-joining at a new place of posting during his general transfers is a trivial charge and the fact there is no progress in the enquiry shows that the Respondents are not considering the same as a serious misconduct.
8. Secondly, as regards the articles of charge/charge memorandum issued to the Petitioner on 12.04.2020, the enquiry officer appointed to conduct the enquiry has held that the articles of charge framed against the Petitioner are not proved. Thereafter, no progress was made out by the Respondents and denying promotion to the Petitioner on account of the pendency of the disciplinary enquiry referred to above would lead to a double punishment. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions:-
(i) The Respondent-Authorities are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, without reference to the charge memorandums issued vide Cr.No.4961/2019/CPE/B3- 10, dated 04.11.2019 and File.No.Rev.04-11030/9/2020- ASEC-COPE, dated 12.04.2020.
(ii) There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 24.06.2026
Note:- Issue C.C by today.
B/o.
chs
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO:16363/2026 Dt. 24.06.2026
chs