HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
WRIT PETITION Nos.32566, 32844, 34750, 34760, 35016, 35069,
35748, 37153, 37324 AND 38647 OF 2014
COMMON ORDER:
Since the subject matter in all these writ petitions are one and
the same, these writ petitions are disposed of by the common order.
2. The grievance of the petitioners in all these writ petitions is that
the action of the respondents in trying to terminate the contract works
of the petitioners in running the mid-day meals in the respective schools without there being any plausible reason and without issuing any notice is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and Principles of natural justice and pass suitable orders.
3. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education representing on behalf of the respondents.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education, relying upon the judgment dated 31.10.2019 in W.P. Nos.8037 of 2019 and batch, argued that said judgment also relates to the implementation of mid-day meals scheme by the Government and challenge of some of the petitioners was against their removal and hence, the said judgment squarely applies to the cases on hand and thus, requested to dispose of these writ petitions in terms of the said judgment. 2
5. On a close scrutiny of the judgment in W.P. No.8037 of 2019 and batch, it is noticed that a learned single judge of this Court having relied upon the earlier division bench judgment in D.Ameena Bee v. Commissioner, Anantapur Municipality, Anantapur1, has held that, in his opinion, the petitioners therein had not made out a case for issuance of a writ of mandamus and the Court did not find an enforceable legal/statutory right that was available to the petitioners which would entitle them to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court and seek a writ of mandamus, dismissed the writ petitions.
6. Needless to emphasize, these writ petitions are squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment. By following the said judgment and in terms thereof, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 04.102021 SS 1 2005 (2) ALT 576