Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/74/2026 of VANKUDAVATH LAKSHMA NAIK Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 1 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 74/2026 Between: 1. VANKUDAVATH LAKSHMA NAIK, S/O LATE SRI KOTA NAIK AGED 44 YEARS, OCC
APHC010722282025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 74/2026
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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.
1. VANKUDAVATH LAKSHMA NAIK, S/O LATE SRI KOTA NAIK AGED 44 YEARS, OCC LINEMAN, APCPDCL, RAJAMPALEM VILLAGE DARSI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, POWER AND ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.
2. ANDHRA PRADESH CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, VIDYUTH BHAVAN, BESIDE RAJ BHAVAN, VIJAYAWADA-520008, NTR DISTRICT.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ENQUIRIES, ANDHRA PRADESH CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. CORPORATE OFFICE, 2NDFLOOR, VIDYUTH BHAVAN, BESIDE RAJ BHAVAN, VIJAYAWADA-520008, NTR DISTRICT.
4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD., OPERATIONS CIRCLE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. .
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OPERATIONS, ANDHRA PRADESH CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. KANIGIRI,
DR,J W.P.No.74 of 2026
PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523230
...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 to pleased to issue any Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declare the action of the respondents in proceeding with the departmental enquiry while the criminal proceedings before the ACB Court are pending adjudication and further declaring the action of the respondents in issuing Memo dated 22.12.2025, through which directing the petitioner for oral enquiry on 06.01.2026 as bad, illegal, unjust, improper, contrary to law, contrary CCA Rules and unconstitutional and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DEVASOTTU KISHORE NAIK Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)
2. GP FOR SERVICES I
DR,J W.P.No.74 of 2026
The Court made the following ORDER:-
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“…to issue any Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declare the action of the respondents in proceeding with the departmental enquiry while the criminal proceedings before the ACB Court are pending adjudication and further declaring the action of the respondents in issuing Memo dated 22.12.2025, through which directing the petitioner for oral enquiry on 06.01.2026 as bad, illegal, unjust, improper, contrary to law, contrary CCA Rules and unconstitutional…”
2. The charge against the petitioner in the departmental enquiry is that, while working as Line man, Rajampalli Village in Operation Section, Darsi Mandal, the petitioner demanded and accepted a bribe amount of Rs.51,000/- from one Sri P.Subba Rao on 11.01.2021 where he was caught red handed by the ACB. The ACB registered the crime in Cr.No.01/RCT-OGL/2021 against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. The ACB authorities, after due investigation, filed charge sheet before learned Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Nellore, based on the very same allegations that form the subject matter of the departmental proceedings. A perusal of the charge memo indicates that the list of witnesses cited therein is identical to that in the criminal case. Likewise the documentary evidence, refers to the FIR and documents forming part of the criminal case record.
DR,J W.P.No.74 of 2026
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader, who does not dispute that the evidence in both proceedings is substantially the same.
5. This Court has examined the charge sheet and the departmental enquiry papers. It is evident that the allegations, witnesses, and documents in both proceedings are identical. In such circumstances, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State Bank of India and others v. Neelam Nag and another1 , the departmental enquiry may be stayed to avoid prejudice for a limited period of one year. The Sessions Court is also expedite the trial.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i) The departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall remain stayed for a period of one (01) year.
ii) The learned Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Nellore, shall endeavour to complete the trial pertaining to Cr.No.01/RCT-OGL/2021 of ACB, Ongole Police Station of Prakasam District as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one (01) year from the date of receipt of this order.
iii) The petitioner shall fully cooperate for early conclusion of the criminal trial. In the event the petitioner is found to be delaying or evading the process of the Court, the disciplinary authority shall be at liberty to proceed with the departmental enquiry notwithstanding the stay.
DR,J W.P.No.74 of 2026
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date: 02.02.2026
Dvs
DR,J W.P.No.74 of 2026
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No.74 of 2026
Dated: 02.02.2026
Dvs