Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Between vs And on 23 April, 2025
1
CGR, J.
W.P.No.9401 of 2025
APHC010176092025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3506]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 9401/2025
Between:
Gowrigari Nageswaramma ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. M SHANMUKHA TEJA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"... to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the order vide Memo No.51/A/2024, dated 29.10.2024, issued by the 3rd respondent thereby terminating the petitioner from the services as Anganwadi worker without furnishing the enquiry report and without considering the explanation, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits and to pass ...."
2. Heard Sri M.Shanmukha Teja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Ch.Swapna Priya, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare Department appearing for the respondents. 2
CGR, J.
W.P.No.9401 of 2025
3. Petitioner was initially appointed as Anganwadi Worker at Gandlapadu Anganwadi Centre, Putlur Mandal, Anantapuramu District, on 03.11.1993. Since then, she has been rendering her services. Based on certain complaints, for the first time, by proceedings in Rc.No.27/2024-25, dated 05.08.2024, the 3rd respondent called for certain documents, such as Aadhar card, SSC Marks list, Caste Certificate and nativity certificate from petitioner. Petitioner submitted the same. Later, 3rd respondent issued show-cause notice, dated 18.09.2024, stating that as per enquiry conducted, it was found that petitioner has submitted 10th Class certificate by interpolating the date of birth as 10.08.1970, when the School records shown the date of birth as 10.06.1966 and thereby called upon petitioner to submit explanation. Petitioner has submitted explanation on 23.09.2024 refuting the same. However, the 3rd respondent has passed impugned proceedings in Memo.No.51/A/2024, dated 29.10.2024, by which, petitioner came to be removed from service. Assailing the said Memo., present writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner primarily contends that petitioner was not supplied with enquiry report, which was based for the final decision of removal from service besides though petitioner was issued show-cause notice and explanation was submitted, without 3 CGR, J.
W.P.No.9401 of 2025reference to any of the same, the impugned proceedings came to be issued. There is no application of mind and the impugned order does not contain any reasons for coming to aforesaid decision.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on the other hand placed on record written instructions stating that the 3rd respondent has, having conducted enquiry, passed the impugned order of removal from service and tried to justify the said order.
6. Perused the record and considered the rival contentions of either side.
7. The 3rd respondent having issued show-cause notice on 18.09.2024, for which petitioner submitted explanation on 29.09.2024, without any reference or adverting to the same, the impugned order has been passed which itself goes to show that there is complete lack of application of mind. When the entire exercise of enquiry is sought to be progressed on the basis of the discrete enquiry conducted behind the back of the petitioner, the basic fundamental requirement of providing such enquiry report before any further action is taken is sine qua non and non-furnishing of the same clearly amounts to violation of principles 4 CGR, J.
W.P.No.9401 of 2025of natural justice. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order cannot be sustained.
8. In view of the same, the writ petition is allowed at the admission stage and the impugned order vide Memo.No.51/A/2024, dated 29.10.2024, issued by the 3rd respondent is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the 3rd respondent to conduct enquiry de novo after providing petitioner copy of the enquiry report and also allowing her to submit any further explanation and hearing and after considering such explanation to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Till the aforesaid exercise is completed, the petitioner shall be reinstated into service forthwith subject to the outcome of the enquiry. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:23.04.2025.
cs