APHC010223872012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 28299/2012 Between: D. Mallikarjuna Swamy, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P Rep By Its Project Director and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V V SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) The Court made the following: 2 ORDER:- The petitioner is challenging the proceedings dated 26.06.2012, whereby the petitioner was found to have misappropriated an amount of Rs. 13,515/-, an enquiry was conducted, and recovery of the amount of Rs. 13,515/- was proposed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings were issued without conducting any enquiry. It is further submitted that the 2nd respondent is empowered to issue the necessary proceedings for reappointing the petitioner after recovering any amounts found due from the petitioner. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was engaged for a period of one (01) year as a Field Assistant during the financial year 2008-2009, and the contract was extended for a further period of three (03) years, and ended on 31.03.2012. It is submitted that the petitioner and the respondents have a contractual relationship, and the same would not amount to an employer-employee relationship. It is further submitted that a Social Audit was conducted, and the petitioner was found to have misappropriated an amount of Rs.13,515/-. It is submitted that the petitioner has not filed any appeal against the impugned order, and that the impugned order would entitle the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not been in service thereafter. 3 4. Recording the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this Court finds no grounds to interfere, leaving it open for the petitioner to challenge the impugned proceedings before the competent authority. 5. With these observations, this 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 20.02.2025 PNS