Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
D Swetha vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 2 May, 2024
APHC010190842024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3328]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA
PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 10268/2024
Between:
1. D SWETHA, W/O MALLIKARJUN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC
PANCHAYAT SECRETARY GRADE - VI (DIGITAL ASSISTANT),
SACHIVALAYAM-2, BESTHAVARIPETA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. R/O
THURUMELLA VILLAGE, CUMBUM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVT., PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, PVS
EMPIRE, D. NO. 12-47, PATHURU ROAD, BESIDE RELIANCE
DIGITALS, TADEPALLE VILLAGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 501.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (PANCHAYAT WING) PRAKASAM
DISTRICT, ONGOLE
4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, PRAKASAM DISTRICT,
ONGOLE.
5. THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MANDAL PRAJA
PARISHAD, BESTHAVARIPETA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
6. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, VILLAGE SECRETARIAT,
2
BESTHAVARIPETA-2, BESTHAVARIPETA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
7. G NARENDRA, OCC PANCHAYAT SECRETARY (DDO), VILLAGE
SECRETARIAT, BESTHAVARIPETA-2, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A RAJENDRA BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV
The Court made the following ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri V. Ramesh, learned Government Pleader for Services-IV appearing for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Smt. B.V. Aparna Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.4,5 & 6.
2. Prayer made in the Writ Petition is as under:-
".......to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in RC.No.353/2023 (PTS) A7, dt.10.07.2023 issued by the 3rd Respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner and the proceedings No.ROC.No.353/2023 (PTS) A7, dt.01-03-2024 issued by the 4th Respondent directing the 5th Respondent to issue notice for recovery of all the emoluments claimed from the date of joining till the date of termination from service and to deposit to State ex-chequer by duly filing criminal case, and notice issued by the 5th Respondent vide proceedings in RC.No.B/12/2024, dt.07.03.2024 directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.4,24,817/- within 3 days is arbitrary, illegal, malafide and colourable exercise of power and in violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and in violation of APCS (CC&A) Rules and principles of natural justice and to set aside the same, and to issue a consequential direction to the 3rd Respondent to 3 continue the petitioner in service as Panchayat Secretary Grade VI (Digital Assistant) with all consequential benefits, and to pass such other order or orders which are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. Facts of the case are that the Writ Petitioner secured employment in the service of Respondent No.5 under Physically Handicapped reservation. The Writ Petitioner has availed the reservation on the basis of 'hearing impairment'. The Writ Petitioner has submitted the medical certificates indicating that her disability is about 75%, while the requirement for being entitled for reservation is about 40% disability. Basing on certain complaints, the Writ Petitioner was against subjected to a test and the Medical Experts Committee has given a report that her disability is only 15%, and therefore, she is not entitled for employment under the reservation meant for the Physically Handicapped category. Vide Proceeding dated 10.07.2023 bearing Roc.No.353/2023 (Pts) A7, Respondent No.3 has terminated the services of the Writ Petitioner herein. This Proceeding is now under challenge.
4. Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that the Impugned Order is passed in blatant violation of Principles of Natural Justice, inasmuch as the Writ Petitioner was never given an opportunity to present her case. The second objection raised by the Writ Petitioner is that once having appointed as regular employee, any disciplinary proceeding should be preceded by Advance Notice with a reasonable opportunity for an employee to present his/her case. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that in the present case, the Termination Order 4 was unilateral, and there was no enquiry of any kind preceding the passing of the Impugned Order dated 10.07.2023.
5. Sri V. Ramesh, learned Government Pleader for Services-IV has drawn the attention to the 'references' cited in the Impugned Order to submit that an enquiry was made before passing the Impugned Order. This Court has sifted through the said 'references'. There are two references. The first reference is the Proceeding of the Collector dated 14.02.2023. The second reference is the Proceeding of Superintendent, Govt. E.N.T Hospital, Visakhapatnam, which is the intimation given to the Writ Petitioner to attend for Medical Examination. Except these references, the Impugned Order does not give any indication that proper enquiry was conducted under relevant Rules by duly following the Principles of Natural Justice.
6. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the Impugned Order suffers not only from the vice of non-adherence to the Principles of Natural Justice but also from the vice of non-adherence to the Rules and Regulations. Therefore, the Impugned Order cannot be sustained in law. Accordingly, the Impugned Order dated 10.07.2023 bearing Roc.No.353/2023 (Pts) A7 (Ex.P.1) is set aside and the consequential Order dated 07.03.2024 bearing Rc.No.B/12/2024 dated 07.03.2024 (Ex.P.3 ) is also set aside. The Respondents are at liberty to initiate fresh Proceedings in accordance with law duly following the Principles of Natural Justice at every stage.
5
7. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No Order as to Costs.
8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this Order.
______________________________________ (GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J) Dt: 02.05.2024 Note: Issue C.C by 06.05.2024.
B/O: JKS 6 56 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 10268 OF 2024 02.05.2024 JKS