Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
A Inthiyaz vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 23 January, 2025
APHC010007282024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331]
THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 539/2024
Between:
1. A INTHIYAZ, S/O A. KHALANDAR, AGED 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO.4-
1418, KALYANDURG ROAD, ANANTHAPURAMU TOWN,
ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, AP
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.
2. THE ANDHRA PRADESH CORPORATION FOR, OUTSOURCES
SERVICES, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 2ND FLOOR,
NTR ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, PANDIT NEHRU BUS STATION,
VIJAYAWADA.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT AT
ANANTHAPURAMU.
4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
ANANTHAPURAMU,ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT.
5. THE TAHSILDAR, ANANTHAPURAMU,ANANTHAPURAMUDISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
2
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 be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction declaring the action of the respondents no.3 and 5 in not reinstating the petitioner into service as Data Entry Operator in the O/o 5th respondent in spite of the recommendation of the 4 respondent vide Rc.No.E/1726/2022, Dt.27.09.2022 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents no.3 to 5 to reinstate the petitioner into service as Data Entry Operator in the O/o 5th respondent and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Data Entry Operator in the O/o 5th respondent forthwith, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following ORDER:
Heard Sri N.Aswartha Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appeared on behalf of the respondents 1,3 to 5.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Data Entry Operator in the office of the District Collector vide Placement Intimation Letter No.PIL-DC-ATP-003182- 191120200111, dated 19.11.2020 (Ex.P.1). Be that as it may, a case in Crime No.194 of 2022 was registered against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections419, 420, 467, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC and Section 35 and 36 of Aadhar Act, 2016 by Ananthapuramu III Town Police.
3The petitioner is shown as Accused No.3 in the said crime. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.08.2022. Later, the petitioner was enlarged on bail. The petitioner made a representation dated 23.09.2022 to the 4th respondent to reinstate him as a Data Entry Operator. The 4th respondent, in turn, addressed a letter vide Rc.No.E/1726/2022, dated 27.09.2022 to the 3rd respondent to issue appropriate orders. However, the 3rd respondent has not passed any orders and hence, the above writ petition is filed.
3. Initially, a Counter-affidavit was filed by the Tahsildar about the registration of the case against the petitioner and the letter addressed by the 4th respondent to the 3rd respondent. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 5th respondent, it is not disputed about the appointment of the petitioner as Data Entry Operator on outsourcing appointment.
4. 3rd respondent filed a separate counter-affidavit wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner has not attended the duty since August 2022 and his remuneration has not been drawn. Since the petitioner is an outsourcing employee only, APCSC (Conduct) Rules, 1964 have no application and the petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody for 14 days. It was also mentioned about the letter addressed by the 4th respondent to the 3rd respondent. Eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services reiterated the averments as per the writ affidavit and counter-affidavits respectively.
6. The 1st respondent issued a circular Memo No.GAD01- SU0mICS/31/2019-SU-I, dated 20.11.2019 incorporating the guidelines for the Andhra Pradesh Corporation for Outsourced Services (APCOS) under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. As per the guidelines, a district-level Committee shall be constituted in every district consisting of (i) Chairperson -
4District Collector & Ex-Officio Exe. Director of APCOS; (ii) Member-convenor - Joint Collector-II; (iii) Member - Representative of the indenting Organization.
7. In the case at hand, there is no dispute that the 4th respondent addressed a letter to the 3rd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner on humanitarian grounds for reinstatement. The committee has to decide on that as per the present circumstances.
8. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side directing the 3rd respondent to decide on the representation made by the petitioner dated 23.09.2022, as per the guidelines and other rules in vogue, within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J Date: 23.01.2025 KA 5 217 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 539 of 2024 Date: 23.01.2025 KA