APHC010623532012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 21958/2012 Between: Vana Dhanalaxmi, Srikakulam Dist ...PETITIONER AND Prl Secy To Govt S W Dept Hyd 3 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P RAJKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 2. GP FOR WOMEN DEV, CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following: 2 ORDER:- The petitioner is challenging the proceedings dated 10.07.2012 whereby the 3rd respondent removed the petitioner from the post of Anganwadi Worker of Komanapalli Colony Village, Hiramandalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. The petitioner was working as an Anganwadi Worker from 20.02.2008. 2. On 14.11.2011 the petitioner was placed under suspension. Thereafter the petitioner filed W.P.No.31173 of 2011 challenging the suspension order. This Court, vide order dated 25.11.2011, suspended the impugned suspension order dated 14.11.2011. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to issue show cause notice and conduct an enquiry. The respondents issued a show cause notice dated 17.05.2012, levelling certain allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted her explanation on 20.05.2012. However, a second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 28.05.2012, with the additional allegations. The respondents without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, passed the impugned proceedings dated 10.07.2012. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition was filed. 3. This Court, vide order dated 20.07.2012, had granted suspension of the impugned proceedings and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner as an Anganwadi worker. Admittedly, the respondents did not comply with the directions passed by this Court in W.P.No.31173 of 2011 dated 21.03.2012. This Court had directed the respondents to complete the enquiry within a 3 specified time and pass final orders. However, the respondents took their own sweet time and passed orders in a questionable manner. The same is evident from the impugned proceedings as well. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the State submits that an enquiry was conducted and the impugned proceedings have been issued, as the petitioner was found guilty of misconduct. However, the petitioner is continuing in service, as directed by this Court. 5. The impugned proceedings would have to be set aside, as they are devoid of any details and were passed by the 3rd respondent out of vengeance. Any order of removal or imposing of major punishment must be a Speaking Order, and such cryptic orders, as the impugned orders cannot sustain the scrutiny of law and logic. Therefore, the impugned proceedings dated 10.07.2012 are hereby set aside. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 24.01.2025 PNS