APHC010708192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 36620/2025 Between: 1. VANDARNGI SRIDEVI, W/O V.V.GIRI, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC ACCOUNTANT IN KGVB SCHOOL, KOTTURU VILAGE, AND MANDAL, R/O DOOR NO. 14-491, SAI DURGA NAGAR, NAKKALAPETA, PALAKONDA TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT,. ANDHRAPRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE PROJECT DIRECTOR, SAMAGRA SIKSHA, ABHIYAN ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE ADDITIONAL PROJECT COORDINATOR, SAMAGRA SIKSHA ABHIYAN , SRIKAKULAM TOWN AND DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the termination order dt. 03.10.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal arbitrary, violation of article of 21 of the constitution of India and principle of natural justice and consequently set aside the same, direct reinstatement of the petitioner into service as accountant I KGVB School with continuity of service back wages and consequential benefits, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased pleased to interim suspend the impugned order dt 03.10.2025 and directed to continue the petitioner as an accountant in KGVB School in Kotturu vilage & Mandal of Srikakulam district pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. UMASANKAR LOKANADHAM 2 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAGHU BABU KALAMATA SC For Samagra Siksha 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR SERVICES III The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 36620/2025 ORDER: 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of termination dated 03.10.2025, whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated. 2. It is submitted that a show cause notice dated 23.09.2025 was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to submit an explanation with regard to the newspaper reports relating to 46 rice bags allegedly found hidden in the premises of KGBV, Kotturu, covered by plastic gunny bags, old utensils etc. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted his explanation categorically stating that he had neither resorted to any misappropriation nor indulged in any act of misconduct. It is further submitted that the impugned proceedings dated 03.10.2025 refer to the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officers as well as the report of the Tahsildar. The impugned order has also been passed by placing reliance upon the news items published in various newspapers on 21.09.2025 and other relevant material. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, without conducting a proper enquiry, the respondents could not have imposed the severe punishment of dismissal/termination from service upon the petitioner. 4 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that widespread newspaper reports revealed that the rice bags meant for the students’ midday meal scheme in the KGBV schools had been largely misappropriated and that several newspapers had reported the illegal storage of the said rice bags. It is further submitted that the Tahsildar of Kotturu Mandal conducted a field inspection on 20.09.2025 and concluded that there were serious lapses in stock management. It is submitted that the impugned proceedings were issued only after conducting an enquiry and that, since the petitioner was engaged on a contractual basis with the respondents, he cannot claim any relief from this Court.. 5. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Perused the material on record. 6. The enquiry conducted by the Tahsildar on 20.09.2025 was concluded on the very same day. A perusal of the report submitted by the Tahsildar would disclose that it was merely an inspection report prepared on 20.09.2025. Curiously, the impugned proceedings do not refer to any enquiry having been conducted with respect to the charges allegedly framed against the petitioner. It is also pertinent to note that no formal charges were framed against the petitioner and no regular enquiry was conducted by the respondents before imposing the severe punishment of termination from service. Any punishment imposed by an 5 authority on any employee would have to follow the due process of law and the principles of natural justice. 7. On the facts of the present case, it is evident that the respondents have merely relied upon the newspaper reports and proceeded to impose the punishment of termination of services upon the petitioner without conducting any proper enquiry. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement into service. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any back wages. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 06.05.2026 KGM 6 97 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 36620/2025 Dated 06.05.2026 KGM