APHC010174822012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 20304/2012 Between: 1. V. SUBRAMANYAM, S/O. VELAUDAM, FIELD ASSISTANT, APREGS, PITCHATUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, R/O. PITCHATUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHITTOOR CHITTOOR DISTRICT, - 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DWMA CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE M P D O PITCHATUR MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toto issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of termination vide Notice No. W.P. No. 28103/2008, dated 12.6.2012 of the 2nd respondent, and quash the same, by holding the said impugned order dated 12.6.2012 without giving any opportunity and without conducting any proper enquiry as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, high handed, violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be justified in the eye of law, and consequently direct the respondents, to retain and continue the petitioner as Field Assistant with all consequential benefits. IA NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP 26037 OF 2012 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 direct the Respondents to retain and continue Petitioner in service as Field Assistant by suspending the operation' of impugned order Vide W.P.28103 of 2008, dated:12.6.2012 of the 2nd Respondent forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice. IA NO: 4 OF 2012(WPMP 156310 OF 2012 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 IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WVMP 658 OF 2013 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 2 vacate the interim order dated 05.07.2012 passed in W.P.M.P.NO.26037/2012 in W.P.No.20304 / 2012 IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 12088 OF 2015 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 set aside the dismissal order dt 20-03-2015 passed in WP No: 20304/2012 by restoring the same by its original position and the interim order dt 5-7-2012 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CH SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.20304 of 2012 ORDER: 1. The petitioner has challenged the order of termination dated 12.06.2012. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, by order dated 05.07.2012, this Court suspended the impugned proceedings and directed the respondents to continue the petitioner as Field Assistant pending further orders. 3. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that, in pursuance of the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioner was reinstated and re-engaged. However, on account of the petitioner’s involvement in a criminal case vide C.C. No.46 of 2010, further action was taken. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner was subsequently removed from engagement and was disengaged. It is also submitted that the respondents have now engaged Sri S. Uday Kumar as Junior Mate for the said vacancy. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on the contrary, submits that the Gram Panchayat was downgraded to Grade–III and that the post of Field Assistant was reduced to that of Junior Mate. He further submitted that the petitioner was implicated in the case which formed the subject matter of the show cause notice and the subsequent 4 orders of removal, and that the petitioner has now been acquitted and would therefore be entitled to re-engagement. 6. Considering the submissions, it is left open to the respondents to consider re-engaging the petitioner as and when necessity arises. 7. With the above observation, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N KGM 5 268 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.20304 of 2012 Dated 09.04.2026 KGM