APHC010176442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 9403/2025 Between: M Ramachandra ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M HEMALATHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2 CGR, J W.P.No.9403 of 2025 The Court made the following order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in preventing the petitioner from performing his duties as Filed Assistant in Thalupula Mandal, Ananthapuram Sathya Sai District, as illegal, arbitrary discriminatory, violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violation of principles of natural justice, consequently direct the 3rd respondent to set aside the orders and conduct proper enquiry and allow the petitioner to continue his duties as Field Assistant in Thalupula Mandal and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard Ms M.Hemalatha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 5 and Smt B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned Standing counsel for respondent No.4. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant on 30.01.2017 at Thalupula Village and Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. On the allegation of dereliction of duties, the petitioner was issued show cause notice and after calling for explanation, the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in R.C.No.35/F.A.-S.M.Talupula/Sri Sathya Sai/2024, dated 10.02.2025, removed the petitioner from service. 3 CGR, J W.P.No.9403 of 2025 Assailing the said proceedings, the petitioner preferred appeal before the 2nd respondent on 03.03.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made against the petitioner are without any basis and there is no evidence in support of such allegations. However, the respondents have resorted to severe punishment of removal without proper appreciation of explanation offered by the petitioner. 5. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 5 on instructions submits that appeal preferred by the petitioner is being considered and disposed of, in accordance with law, and he also denied the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Against the impugned order of removal, since the petitioner has already preferred appeal before the 2nd respondent, this Court is not inclined to enter into merits of the matter, as it would tantamount to entertaining parallel proceedings. 7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, at the admission stage, with the consent of both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass speaking orders on the appeal preferred by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of hearing, within a period of 4 CGR, J W.P.No.9403 of 2025 four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 16.04.2025 KBN