A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, comprising Justices Ravinath Tilhari and R. Raghunandan Rao, has set aside G.O. Rt. No.552 issued by Home (Courts-A) Department (dated May 22, 2023) and consequently the appointment of J. Sudarshan Reddy as Director of Prosecutions (DoP) of Andhra Pradesh while partly allowing and disposing of a writ petition filed by additional DoP B. Ramakoteswara Rao.
The Bench ordered that a new DoP should be appointed by following the due process after obtaining the concurrence of the Chief Justice within four months and, in the meanwhile, continue Mr. Sudarshan Reddy as the interim DoP.
The court also directed the Principal Secretary (Home) to finalise the method of appointment of the DoP in line with it’s (the court) observation that the said process should be indicative that the search for a meritorious candidate was undertaken and the appointment was made only on the basis of merit and not for any other consideration.
Besides, the High Court directed the respondent (Principal Secretary) to finalise the terms of appointment of the DoP, including tenure, setting up a disciplinary authority, conditions of removal or suspension etc.
Mr. Ramakoteswara Rao’s grievance was that the impugned appointment was in violation of the objectives, policy and legislative history of the formation of the cadre of prosecutors vis-a-vis the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, various reports of the Law Commission of India and National Police Commission, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and various other statutes.
He insisted that he deserved and had the required experience to be posted as the DoP by promotion, and maintained that Mr. Sudarshan Reddy was an out-of-cadre officer and the DoP was treated as “a politically nominated post,” and hence his appointment was illegal.
