WP/2634/2026 of PUNTROTHU JAYAVANTHARAO Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 30 January 2026

1. PUNTROTHU JAYAVANTHARAO, S/O LATE ADHINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RETIRED ASSISTANT TREASURY OFFICER R/O P.M. PALEM , VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, AT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522238..

2. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES AND ACCOUNTS, ANDHRA PRADESH, 1ST FLOOR, NIDHI BHAVAN, BEHIND APIIC BUILDING, I T PARK, MANGALAGIRI 522503, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522503.

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, , DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICE, P AND T COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530013.

...RESPONDENT(S):

::2::

This Court made the following ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief:

“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 my representations including the representation dated 30.7.2024 and 8.1.2026 for grant of all service benefits, including release of increments pension, etc., as bad, arbitrary and violative of A P Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991 and also offends Arts. 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and to pass….”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The petitioner joined service as a Shroff on 08.10.1986 at Kothuratla Village in the erstwhile Visakhapatnam District and was subsequently promoted as Junior Accountant, Senior Accountant (in 2011), Sub-Treasury Officer, and finally as Assistant Treasury Officer at the Divisional Sub-Treasury Office, Anakapalli (East) in 2020. He retired from service on 30.04.2021. While working as STO at the Divisional Sub- Treasury Office, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam in 2018, a fraudulent drawal of excess pension amounting to Rs.90,24,584/- was detected. The

::3::

fraud was committed by one Y. Venkata Narasinga Rao, a Junior Assistant appointed on compassionate grounds. The entire misappropriated amount was recovered and remitted to the Government. During much of 2018–2019, the petitioner was on sanctioned leave and thereafter served at Vizianagaram and Anakapalli. A criminal case was registered on 20.10.2018 against the said individuals; however, the principal accused later died and the proceedings abated. The petitioner had reported the fraud to higher authorities and deposed on behalf of the department. Nevertheless, Charge Memo dated 22.03.2021 was issued against the petitioner, to which he submitted explanations on 22.04.2021 and 30.07.2024. An enquiry report dated 24.11.2023 was followed by Government Orders dated 25.06.2024 and proceedings dated 04.07.2024 under Rule 21(2) of the APCS (CC&A) Rules, 1991. Though the enquiry attributed certain supervisory lapses to the petitioner, it recorded that the fraud was committed by the Junior Assistant, that the entire amount was recovered, and that no loss was caused to the State exchequer. Despite this, the respondents have not released the petitioner’s full pension and other retiral benefits under the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, nor have they considered his representations dated 30.07.2024 and 08.01.2026. Hence, the present writ petition.

::4::

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the general instructions issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022, wherein the Government directed the disciplinary authorities that, in all simple cases, the enquiry initiated against a Government servant shall be completed within a period of three months, either by departmental officers or by the Commissioner of Enquiries, and in complicated cases, the enquiry shall be completed within a period of five to six months. It was further directed that the Secretaries to the Government shall review the progress of enquiries ordered in all disciplinary cases. However, in the present case, though the petitioner was not directly involved in the incident and was only holding the in- charge position at the relevant point of time as Assistant Treasury Officer, his name has also been included in the charge.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the general instructions issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022, as well as the findings recorded in the enquiry report, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of three (03) months. Upon conclusion of the proceedings within the stipulated period, the respondents are further

::5::

directed to release the pensionary and other retiral benefits to the petitioner within a further period of two (02) months thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:20.01.2026 klk

::6::

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH

WRIT PETITION No.2634 of 2026

Dt:31.01.2026 klk