THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No.10970 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following prayer: “to declare the action of the Respondent No.3 in terminating the services of the petitioner vide impugned order in vide SI.No.08/2024/DVC/E2, dated 25.01.2025 which is highly illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and violation of Article 21 and 311(2) of the Constitution of India and contrary to law laid down by the Honble Apex Court and hence the same is liable to be set aside and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 and 3 to reinstate the petitioner into service as Field Assistant with all consequential benefits from the date of temporary termination 03.09.2024 in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court as the respondent authorities have not followed any procedure as contemplated under law and to pass.” 2. Heard Sri K.Satyanarayana Murthy, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services–I appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel, appearing for respondents 3 to 5 and Sri G.Srinivasula Reddy, learned standing counsel, appearing for 6th respondent. 2 CGR, J W.P. No.10970 of 2025 3. Petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant of Palavalasa Village, Saribujji Mandal, Srikakulam District, on 17.05.2007. On certain allegations, he was temporarily terminated by 3rd respondent by orders dated 03.09.2024, and was called upon to submit explanation on the charges levelled. After submitting explanation, the 3rd respondent has passed final orders dated 25.01.2025 removing petitioner from service. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner has preferred appeal before 2nd respondent on 10.02.2025. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner, assailing the order passed by 3rd respondent, contends that the impugned order has been passed without considering petitioner’s explanation in proper perspective and that the procedure adopted in concluding the enquiry is vitiated on account of non-submission of enquiry report and therefore, seeks to set aside the same. 5. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned standing counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents 3 to 5, on the other hand, submits that as petitioner has already availed alternative remedy of appeal before 2nd respondent, which is being considered, petitioner cannot invoke jurisdiction of this Court as the same amounts to parallel enquiry. 3 CGR, J W.P. No.10970 of 2025 6. Perused the record and considered rival submissions. 7. This Court finds that the appellate authority is required to dispose of the appeal in terms of the Rules within a period of thirty days, however, as the same has not been disposed of, petitioner is justified in approaching this Court to the extent of seeking directions for such disposal. 8. In view of aforesaid submissions and having considered rival submissions, this Court proposes to dispose the present writ petition with the consent of both counsel, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter by directing 2nd respondent to dispose the petitioner’s appeal dated 10.02.2025 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after providing opportunity of hearing to petitioner and pass appropriate speaking order in accordance with law. 9. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J 28.04.2025 SS