Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14916 (AP)

Darla Premaiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/9535/2025 · 2025-04-16

Challa Gunaranjan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATJ (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE >\r //■< PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 9535 OF 2025 Between: Darla Premaiah, S/o. Prasad, aged 48 years, Occ; Field Assistant MGNREGS, (under temporary suspension) at Gollapalem Grama Panchayath, R Gollapalem Village and Grama Panchayath, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh-522529./D. 1-345 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of Rural Development, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector-cum-District Program Coordinator, MGNREGS, At Guntur, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Project Director and District Water Management Agency (DWMA), At Guntur, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Assistant Project Director, (APD-Guntur Cluster) of MGNREGS, At Guntur, Guntur District. 5. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer-cum-Programme Officer of MNRGS, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, AP. 6. The Assistant Project Officer, for MGNREGS, MPDO Office, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, AP. ...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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the Respondent No.5/MPDO herein in not allowing me to discharge my duties as Field Assistant, for MGNREGS, Veluru Grama more r f Panchayath, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh without assigning any valid reason and there being any remarks from corner any as illegal, arbitrary and principles of natural justice and also to Article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently, direct the Respondent No.5/MPDO to allow the petitioner to discharge his duties as Field Assistant, for MGNREGS, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh. oppose Veluru Grama Panchayath, lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.5/MPDO herein to allow the petitioner to discharge duties as Field Assistant, for MGNREGS, Veluru Grama Panchayath, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu Pradesh pending disposal of the above writ petition. District, Andhra Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJA SEKHAR SYKAM Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 & 6 : SRI M.S.R. CHANDRA MURTHY, SC FOR MGNREGS Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI G. SRINIVASULU REDDY, SC FOR MPDO The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010187622025 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: 9535/2025 Between: Darla Premaiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAJASEKHAR SYKAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I 2 HCGR, J W.P.No.9535of2025 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, more particularly the Respondent No.S/MPDO herein in not allowing me to discharge my duties as Field Assistant, for MGNREGS, Veluru Grama Panchayath, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh without assigning any valid reason and there being remarks from any corner as illegal, arbitrary and principles of natural justice and also oppose to Article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently Respondent No.S/MPDO to allow the petitioner to discharge his duties as Field Assistant, for MGNREGS, Veluru Grama Panchayath, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh, and pass such other order or orders... ” 2. Heard Sri S.Rajasekhar, 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, 4 and 6 and Sri G.Srinivasula Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5. any direct the 3. The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant on 04.06.2007 and has been discharging duties till now. The 5‘^ respondent has memo dated 20.01.2025 attributing certain allegations in discharging his duties and calling upon the petitioner to submit reply. The petitioner has submitted reply dated 24.01.2025. The petitioner was once again issued notice on 22.01.2025 to appear before Gram issue 3 HCGR, J W.P.No.9535 of 2025 Panchayat Enquiry Committee along with records on 27.01.2025. However, the meeting could not take place on the said day. Thereafter, the petitioner has not heard anything about the ongoing inquiry by the 5*'^ respondent. The petitioner was prevented from attending duties and even the 4^^ respondent has deactivated the work ID of the petitioner from 13.01.2025 and allotted the same to some other person. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without any inquiry, the respondents cannot prevent the petitioner from discharging his duties. 4. 5. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel placed on record written instructions dated 15.04.2025 stating that petitioner was initially called upon to attend the inquiry scheduled to be held 25.01.2025, the same was later got postponed to 27.01.2025. However, the petitioner has not attended the inquiry on the said day and the committee, which was entrusted with the said task of concluding the inquiry, did not complete the same. The 4*^ respondent was instructed to conduct the inquiry and he issued notice dated 21.02.2025, calling upon the petitioner to attend the inquiry on 03.03.2025. However, the petitioner did not attend the inquiry on the said day also. As he is deliberately avoiding to appear on HCGR, J W.P.No.9535 of 2025 before the committee, to answer the charges leveled against him, the inquiry could not be completed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner refuting aforesaid submissions submits that except the memo dated 20.01.2025 and subsequent notice dated 22.01.2025, issued by the 5^^ respondent, the petitioner was never served with any notice thereafter. The petitioner, having already submitted explanation, is prepared to contest the charges leveled against him. 7. This Court, having considered the rival submissions, is of the view that since the inquiry, which was initiated by the 5‘^ respondent, is only a preliminary exercise to enable the 3'^ respondent, who is competent authority for giving prima facie opinion, for initiating disciplinary action against the petitioner, and that already the 5‘^ respondent has issued notice calling upon the petitioner to submit explanation and participate in the preliminary inquiry, no interference is warranted. [ The respondent Nos.4 and 5 may now issue fresh notice to petitioner fixing date for inquiry. On receiving such notice, the petitioner has to appear before the Inquiry Officer and submit explanation. Basing on the outcome of such inquiry, it is open to respondent to initiate appropriate proceedings, in case, if it is prima 8. 5 HCGR, J W.P.No.9535 of 2025 facie found that allegations leveled against the petitioner have some substance. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing 9. respondent Nos.3 to 5 to proceed with ongoing inquiry in terms of observations made above. Till such exercise is completed, they shall not obstruct the petitioner to attend duties. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. SR/NIVASA RAJU ASS/STANT.REGISTRAR TON OFF/CER //TRUE COPY// SEC To, Secretary Department of Rural Development, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector-cum-District Program Coordinator, MGNREGS Guntur, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, and District Water Management Agency (DWMA) At Guntur, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Assistant Project Director, (APD-Guntur Cluster) of MGNREGS At Guntur, Guntur District. Development Officer-cum-Programme Officer of MNRGS, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, AP. 6. The Assistant Project Officer, for MGNREGS, MPDO Office Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, AP. 7. One CC to Sri Raja Sekhar Sykam, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Services I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. One CC to Sri M.S.R. Chandra Murthy, SC for MGNREGS (OPUC) lO.One CC to Sri G. Srinivasulu Reddy, SC for MPDO (OPUC) 11.Three C.D. Copies. At Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:16/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.9535 of 2025 2 3 APR 2025 fa: Current Secslion ?S- DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS