Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/10047/2026 of Bukke Krishna Murthy Naik, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 16 April 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 10047/2026 Between: 1. BUKKE KRISHNA MURTHY NAIK,, S/O B. LAKSHMA NAIK,
APHC010198552026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 10047/2026
Between:
1. BUKKE KRISHNA MURTHY NAIK,, S/O B. LAKSHMA NAIK, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC.FOREST
SECTION
OFFICER (RETD) R/O 36/256-64-16-4, SRI MAHALAKSHMI
NAGAR NEAR SUBBIREDDY COLLEGE, KADAPA, YSR
KADAPA DISTRICT - 516002
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
TO
GOVERNMENT,
ENVIRONMENT, FOREST, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT,
A.P.
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238
2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND
HEAD
OF
FOREST
FORCE,
,
ARANYA
BHAVAN,
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522503
3. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, KURNOOL
CIRCLE, KURNOOL-518004
4. THE
DIVISIONAL
FOREST
OFFICER,
TERRITORIAL
KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT-516001
5. DIVISIONAL
FOREST
OFFICER,
SOCIAL
FORESTRY
DIVISION, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT-516001
6. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, VEMPALLE RANGE, VEMPALLE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT-516329
...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 mostly one which is in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Articles of Charge vide Rc.No. 1732/2017/A10 dated 28.08.2017 of the Respondent No.4, Ref.No.7259/2022/A and DC-3
dated 07.02.2025 of the Respondent No.2 and the consequential Show Cause Notice issued vide Memo No. 179/Sec.IV/A2/2025-2
dated 12.01.2026 by the Respondent No.1 to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unsustainable, without jurisdiction, contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, A.P Revised Pension Rules, 1980 and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to release the pensionary benefits to the petitioner 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 stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of show cause Notice issued vide Memo No. 179/Sec. IV/A2/2025-2 dated 12.01.2026 of the Respondent No.1 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SODUM ANVESHA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the notice dated 12.01.2026 issued by the 1st respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondents.
3. At the admission stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised certain legal issues for issuing the impugned notice dated 12.01.2026. While issuing the said notice, the 1st respondent has not considered the representation/explanation submitted by the petitioner on 02.05.2025. Further, in the notice it is clearly stated that the Chief Conservator of Forests and Head of Forest Force, A.P., has communicated the findings of the Inquiry Officer to the Charged Officer vide proceedings dated 10.05.2023. Further, in view of the health condition, the petitioner could not be able to submit the reply within the time and subsequently on 02.05.2025 the petitioner had submitted his elaborate explanation but the same was not considered while issuing the impugned notice.
4. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised an objection that the 4th respondent is the disciplinary authority and after enquiry he has to forward the remarks/findings to the 1st respondent as per Section 9 of A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980. The petitioner has already retired from service. But surprisingly in the instant case, the 2nd respondent has forwarded to the 1st respondent and thereafter the 1st respondent has issued the impugned show cause notice, which is contrary to the rules. Further it was brought to the notice of this Court that to the impugned notice, the petitioner has already submitted one more explanation on 06.03.2026.
5. Considering the above submissions and on perusal of the material placed on record, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the objections submitted by the petitioner on 02.05.2025 and pass appropriate orders as per rules. It is needless to mention that as the disciplinary proceedings were initiated in the year 2017 and now we are in the year 2026, the respondents may pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date:17.04.2026 GK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No:10047 of 2026
Dated:17.04.2026
GK