Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Dakara Siva vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 February, 2024

APHC010073832024
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::
                                           AMARAVATI
                                  (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                          FRIDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
                             TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                                     PRESENT

 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

                        WRIT PETITION NO: 4086 OF 2024

Between:
   1. DAKARA SIVA, S/o Krishna, Aged. 29 years, Occ Field Assistant (Removed),
      R/o. Mettavalasa Village, G.Sigadam Mandal, Srikakulam District.

                                                                   ...PETITIONER(S)
                                     AND
   1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to
      Government, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat,
      Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
   2. District CollectorcumDistrict Programme Coordinator of MGNREGS,
      Srikakulam District at Srikakulam.
   3. Project DirectorcumAdditional District Programme Coordinator of MGNREGS,
      District Water Management Agency, Srikakulam District.
   4. Gprle Mallesu, , S/o Chinnappadu, Aged. 40 years, Occ. Field Assistant, R/o
      Mettavalasa Village, G.SigadamMandal, Srikakulam District - 532168.

                                                                  ...RESPONDENTS

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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.36/2013/E2/GNV, dt. 30.11.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent thereby removed the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant working in Mettavalasa Gram Panchayat in G.Sigadam Mandal of Srikakulam District and appointed the 4th respondent as Field Assistant in Mettavalasa Village, without issuing notice to the petitioner, without conducting enquiry and without passing speaking order as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to Field Assistants Human Resource Policy vide Circular No.666/EGS(P)/201 2, dt. and 08.01.2013 and consequently set aside the proceedings dt. 30.11.2023 and direct the respondents 2 and 3 to reinstate the petitioner into service for the said post. 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 to suspend the operation of proceedings in Rc.No.36/2013/E2/GNV, dt. 30.11.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Field Assistant working in Mettavalasa Gram Panchayat in G.Sigadam Mandal of Srikakulam District, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. SRINIVAS AMBATI

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES IV

The Court made the following:

Heard Sri Sk. Rasheed, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri

Srinivas Ambati, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri M.S.R.

Chandra Murthy, learned Standing for MGNREGS appearing for Respondent

Nos.2 and 3.

2. Prayer made in the present Writ Petition is as under:

"....to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.36/2013/E2/GNV, dt.30.11.2023 passed by the 3rd respondent thereby removed the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant working in Mettavalasa Gram Panchayat in G.Sigadam Mandal of Srikakulam District and appointed the 4 th respondent as Field Assistant in Mettavalasa Village, without issuing notice to the petitioner, without conducting enquiry and without passing speaking order as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to Field Assistants Human Resource Policy vide Circular No.666/EGS(P)/2012, dt.08.01.2013 and consequently set aside the proceedings dt. 30.11.2023 and direct the respondents 2 and 3 to reinstate the petitioner into service for the said post and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case".

3. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner submits that the present

Writ Petition has been filed aggrieved by the Proceedings bearing

Progs.Rc.No.36/2013/E2/GNV dated 30.11.2023 (Ex.P.6), inasmuch as the

Writ Petitioner has been removed from service in order to accommodate the

Respondent No.4 herein. He would submit that the Respondent No.4, vide

Impugned Order dated 30.11.2023 (Ex.P.6) was reinstated into service. He

would submit that the Order of Termination of the Respondent No.4 was

challenged by the said Respondent No.4 vide W.P.No.15930 of 20215. He

would submit that the learned Single Judge of this Court, by Order dated

05.05.2023, has disposed of the said Writ Petition with a direction to the

Respondents to consider the case of the Writ Petitioner by following the

directions given by the learned Single Judge in another Writ Petition bearing

No.11144 of 2015 dated 03.03.2023. Therefore, the directions given by the

learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.11144 of 20215 dated

03.03.2023 (Ex.P.4) are most relevant. The operative portion is usefully

extracted herein :

"13. In view of the same, this writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings issued vide R.C. No. 99/2013/NREGS/S.A dated 30.04.2013 passed by the 4 th respondent by directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 19.05.2014 made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders after conducting a detailed enquiry by giving a fair opportunity to the petitioner. The said process shall be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no orders as to costs."

4. Coming to the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent No.4 bearing

W.P.No.15930 of 2015, the operative portion is also usefully extracted

hereunder in order indicate the link between W.P.No.11144 of 2015 and

W.P.No.15930 of 2015:

"4. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner has requested to issue similar directions in this writ petition also.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has not opposed for passing similar order in this writ petition.

6. In view of the same, this writ petition is also allowed in the same identical lines as indicated in the order dated 03.03.2023 issued in writ petition No.11144 of 2015. There shall be no order as to costs.