1 APHC010388902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 20168/2025 Between: Tamminana Pankaja ...PETITIONER AND The State Of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 20168/2025 The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the show cause notice No.1 of 2025 issued by the Respondent No.7 on 17.07.2025 on the ground that the Respondent No.7 does not have jurisdiction to issue the said show cause notice. 2. The facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows: The Petitioner was initially appointed as Anganwadi worker on 04.11.1992 at Bammidi Anganwadi Centre, Kothuru ICDS Project, Srikakulam District and has been working for more than 32 years without any complaint. While so on 09.06.2025, a complaint was given by Pujari Ramarao and others against the Petitioner on the ground that Anganwadi Centre was closed for 40 days and nutritious food was not being distributed to the eligible beneficiaries. On the said allegations, an enquiry was conducted by Ms.Indira, Child Development Scheme Officer, Patapatnam and held that the Petitioner failed to maintain the records properly and there was no evidence of take home ration being provided to the pregnant and lactating women and children. Pursuant thereto and other reports received by the Respondent No.7, the said show cause notice was 3 issued. Questioning the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. The principal challenge to the show cause notice is that Respondent No.7 does not have jurisdiction to issue the said show cause notice as Respondent No.7 is not the authorized Officer and the Project Director, who is appointing authority, can issue the show cause notice. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.7 would contend that the Respondent No.7 has authority to issue show cause notice as per the Circular Memo No.11645/K2/96, dated 14.03.1997, which was issued by the director of Women Development and Child Welfare, Hyderabad. 5. Considering that the issue is only with regard to authority of Respondent No.7 to issue the impugned show cause notice, this Court is of the opinion that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of with the following direction: (i) The Respondent No.7 shall specifically address the issue of authority/competence to issue the impugned show cause notice while considering the explanation of the Petitioner to the impugned show cause notice. (ii) There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 06.08.2025 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.20168/2025 Dated 06.08.2025 eha