APHC010181102025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 9402/2025 Between: N Chandraiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.CH SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following prayer: “to declare the action of the respondents in keeping the petitioner out of contract employment permanently from service as Field Assistant, P.V.Kandriga Gram Panchayat vide impugned proceedings No.K1/053/2025 dt.04.03.2025 of the 4th respondent without considering the explanation of 2 CGR, J W.P. No.9402 of 2025 the petitioner in proper perspective though the appeal is pending before the 3rd respondent is illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and is gross violation of natural justice and cannot be justified in the eye of law and the consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits by setting aside the impugned proceedings No.K1/053/2025, dt.04.03.2025 of the 4th respondent in the interest of justice and pass such other orders.” 2. Petitioner while working as Field Assistant, based on certain allegations, was placed under temporary termination and after conducting due enquiry, by impugned proceedings dated 04.03.2025 came to be removed from service. Challenging the same, he filed the present writ petition. 3. Heard Sri Ch.Srinivas, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services – I, appearing for respondents 1 to 3, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel, appearing for 4th respondent and Smt.B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned standing counsel, appearing for 5th respondent. 4. Learned standing counsel for 4th respondent brought to the notice of this Court that against the order of removal, petitioner 3 CGR, J W.P. No.9402 of 2025 filed appeal before 3rd respondent and the same is pending consideration. 5. Since petitioner has already availed alternative remedy of filing appeal and the same is pending, petitioner cannot parallelly run proceedings against the very same order. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing appellate authority i.e., 3rd respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by petitioner within a period of six weeks after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _______________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J 10.04.2025 SS