BODIREDDY SAI PRATHAP REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/18352/2025 · 2025-07-21
Nyapathy Vijay
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25331 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25331 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010357082025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18352/2025 Between: Bodireddy Sai Prathap Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. VUTUPALLI RAJANNA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
2.
GP FOR SERVICES I Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4
2. B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, Standing Counsel for R.5. The Court made the following:
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18352/2025
The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of Respondent No.3 in terminating the Petitioner from service as Field Assistant, Matli Grampanchayat, Veeraballi Mandal, Annamayya District, vide Proceedings in Rc.No.A/741/HR/ Termination/2025, dated 18.06.2025, without considering the explanation submitted by the Petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The Petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant on
12.07.2023. While so, a Complaint was issued against the Petitioner on 06.02.2025 by the villagers of Matli Grampanchayat raising certain allegations. On the basis of the complaint, the Respondent No.2 directed the Respondent No.4 to conduct enquiry vide Letter dated 12.03.2025. Pursuant thereto, an enquiry was initiated and the Petitioner was placed under suspension from 07.05.2025. Though the Petitioner denied the allegations, the impugned Order terminating the Petitioner from service came to be passed. Hence, the present Writ Petition.
3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 2,3 and 4 would contend that appeal is provided against the
3
order of termination as per 13 (c) of the Field Assistant Human Resource Policy to the District Collector and the present Writ Petition by-passing the appeal remedy may not be considered.
4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is
disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioner to file appeal under the guidelines provided under 13 (c) of the Field Assistant Human Resource Policy to the District Collector. In the event, the Petitioner files appeal before the District Collector, the District Collector is directed to dispose of the Appeal within a period of eight weeks thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Date: 22.07.2025
eha
4
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO. 18352/2025 Dated 22.07.2025
eha