mf APHC010422312025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMB TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 22285 OF 2025 Between: Mekala Madhu Kumar, S/o. M. Venu Gopal, aged 42 years, R/o. H.No.7-174A, Ward, Nehru Nagar village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Energy Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The Transmission Corporation of AP Limited, Vidyut Soudha Vijayawada, Krishna District Rep. by its Chairman Cum Managing Director, 3. The Superintending Engineer, O and M Circle, AP Transco compound. Near Bellary Chowrastha, Kurnool, Kurnool District 4. The Executive Engineer, O and M Circle, AP Transco, Nandyal, Nandyal District 5. The Asst Executive Engineer, Maintenance, 220 KVSS, Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyal District 6. S Lakshmi Reddy, S/o. Not known to the Petitioner, Contractor, A.P.'Transco, R/o. H.No. 87/515, Sree Nagar Colony, Kurnool A.P. - 518 002 Gunadala, Sub-station A.P. Transco, Civil and Electrical ...Respondents 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 to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 6th Respondent in issuing the notice dated 06.08.2025 terminating the Petitioner from the post of the job of watchman on a contract basis at 220 KVSS Muchumarri, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, without conducting any enquiry as patently illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and also violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the notice dated 06.08.2025. lA 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 to stay the notice dated 06.08.2025 terminating the Petitioner from the post of the job of watchman on a contract basis at 220 KVSS Muchumarri, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, pending disposal of the writ petition, in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES -1 The Court made the following order: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY.THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 22285/2025 APHC010422312025 r [3460] Between: ...PETITIONER Mekala Madhu Kumar AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 2 I: r THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.22285 of 2025 O R D E R; The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the Letter dated 28.07.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 3 to the Respondent No. 6 directing the Petitioner to be removed as Watchman (on an outsourcing basis) at 220 KVSS Muchumarri, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District. The Petitioner was working as a Watchman at 220 KVSS 2. Muchumarri, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District under the control of Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. The Petitioner was working as “Watchman’ on an outsourcing basis through his principal employer Respondent No.6. In a letter given by the local Public Representative recommending the removal of the Petitioner on the ground that he is also working as the Chairman, School Managing Committee at ZPH School, Nehrunagar, Pagidyala Mandal, Nandyala District, the Respondent No.3 had addressed a Letter to the Respondent No.6 on 28.07.2025 to take appropriate action. 3 On the basis of the Letters of elected representative and that of Respondent No.3, the Petitioner was directed to stop from attending duties with immediate effect vide Letter dated 06.08.2025 issued by the Respondent No.6. Hence, the present Writ Petition. % 3. the Standing Counsel appearing for Respondents would contend that the Petitioner is outsourcing employee engaged through Respondent No. 6, and as there is no master-servant relationship between the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, the Petitioner cannot challenge the action of the Respondents in the present Writ Petition. 4. Learned an Having heard the respective counsel, the termination of the Petitioner as a Watchman was principally on the basis of a Letter issued by the Public Representative on 25.07.2025, which consequently was the basis for the Respondent No. 3 to Letter to the Respondent No. 6 virtually for terminating the service of the Petitioner. 5. issue a 4 6. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the State of A.P, rep. by its Principal Secretary v. K. Madhu Phani and another^ held that even the outsourcing employees are entitled to an inquiry to be conducted when their services are being terminated on stigmatic grounds. The relevant paragraph No.4 thereof is extracted hereunder: “ In our opinion, even in case of an outsourced employee, he cannot be stigmatized without an enquiry and in our opinion, the learned Single Judge has correctly appreciated the elements of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury in making the interim order absolute”. Though the impugned order is passed by the Respondent No.6, the purport of the Division Bench Judgment is that there cannot be a whimsical hire and fire approach in public employment. This feudalistic “I do not like” approach has ramifications on the families of individuals like this Petitioner and the entire family would have to face penury. The impugned order, albeit by Respondent No. 6, is solely based on the Letter given by the Public Representative. Therefore, the impugned proceedings are set aside. 7. (2018)1 ALT 125 (DB) a 5 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The Respondent Authorities are directed to continue the Petitioner as a Watchman at 220 KVSS Muchumarri, Pagidyala Mandal Nandyala District. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// i SECTIO^OFFICER To, Energy Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, 1. The Principal Secretary Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Transmission Corporation of AP Vidyut Soudha, Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District. O and M Circle, AP Transco, Sub-station Limited, 3. The Superintending Engineer compound. 4. The Executive Engineer, O and Near Bellary Chowrastha, Kurnool, Kurnool District M Circle, AP Transco, Nandyal Nandyal District 5 The Asst Executive Engineer, Maintenance Muchumarri Village, Pagidyala Mandal. Nandyal District 6. One CC to Sri Varun Byreddy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Services - I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies 220 KVSS, A.P. Transco RAM HIGH COURT DATED:04/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 22285 OF 2025 I 21 SEP 2025 s ^ . Current becimn . ^ ^<£?si>ATcy!^>^ ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS