Delay in Departmental Enquiry Cannot Hold Promotions: AP HC Orders to Consider Promotion of Commercial Tax Officer [Read Order]
There had been no progress in the enquiry in violation of the prescribed timelines, and such delay could not prejudice the petitioner’s right to career advancement, noted the court.
![Delay in Departmental Enquiry Cannot Hold Promotions: AP HC Orders to Consider Promotion of Commercial Tax Officer [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/08/09/2074844-commercial-tax-officer-taxscan.webp "Delay in Departmental Enquiry Cannot Hold Promotions: AP HC Orders to Consider Promotion of Commercial Tax Officer [Read Order]")
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the failure of the authorities to conclude departmental proceedings within the mandated time limit cannot be used as a ground to indefinitely deny a right to promotion of a Commercial Tax Officer. The Court directed the State authorities to consider the promotion of a Commercial Tax Officer to the post of Additional Commissioner of...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the failure of the authorities to conclude departmental proceedings within the mandated time limit cannot be used as a ground to indefinitely deny a right to promotion of a Commercial Tax Officer.
The Court directed the State authorities to consider the promotion of a Commercial Tax Officer to the post of Additional Commissioner of State Tax, notwithstanding the pendency of an enquiry that had exceeded the prescribed duration.
N.Srinivasa Rao, the petitioner, appointed as Commercial Tax Officer in December 1998 and later promoted to Deputy Commissioner (redesignated as Joint Commissioner of State Tax), faced departmental proceedings following allegations that he had developed a private website parallel to the GST portal, allegedly showing lack of integrity and discipline.
Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here
Although charges were framed in March 2023 and an Inquiry Officer was appointed in January 2024, the enquiry had not been concluded even after nearly two years.
The petitioner, stating Government Orders (G.O.Ms.No.679 dated 01.11.2009 and G.O.Ms.No.91 dated 12.09.2022), asserted that departmental enquiries must be completed within three months in simple cases and six months in complex cases.
He further relied on G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999, which ensures that employees in the zone of consideration are not denied promotion merely due to pending proceedings, if delay is attributable to the department. Despite these norms, his promotion was rejected via a memo issued in January 2023.
How to Audit Public Charitable Trusts under the Income Tax Act Click Here
Justice Nyapathy Vijay observed that there had been no progress in the enquiry in violation of the prescribed timelines, and such delay could not prejudice the petitioner’s right to career advancement.
The bench directed the authorities to consider the petitioner’s promotion in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, if he meets the eligibility criteria, and to conclude the enquiry within six months from receipt of the order.
The court said that “The Disciplinary Authority as well as Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer shall be answerable for the delay in concluding the enquiry within the time frame as mentioned above.”
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
