APHC010941022018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 45754/2018 Between: V. RAMBABU, S/O. VENKAIAH, AGE- 41 YEARS, OCC- TECHNICAL ASSISTANT (MGNREGS), R/O. OPP. ZP HIGH SCHOOL, ST COLONY, MURIKIPUDI POST, CHILAKALURIPET MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 626. ...PETITIONER AND THE DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY, REP. BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR, COLLECTOR BANGLAW ROAD, GUTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent: 1. M S R CHANDRA MURTHY The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus i) declaring the action of respondent in not initiating steps for conducting regular enquiry by conducting Gram Sabha and by recording the statements of both villagers and petitioner and also by giving him an opportunity of cross examination of them by considering his representation dt.01-11-2018 and choosing to pass final order basing on stage managed enquiry proceedings as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, colourable exercise of powers, contrary to the circular dt.17-03-2012 and ratio laid down in order dt.07-07-2010 in WP No.14121/2009 and batch besides violative of Arts.14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and ii) consequently, direct the respondent not to pass any final order till 2 conclusion of disciplinary proceedings by way of conducting Gram Sabha duly giving him full opportunity, recording statements of villagers in his presence and giving him an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses/villagers and also direct the respondent to pass final order basing on the report prepared after conducting Gram Sabha.” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent would submit that the writ petition is filed challenging the termination order on the ground that they have not followed the procedure. Thereafter, the Respondent has followed procedure and the Appellate Authority passed order dated 16.11.2022 confirming the orders of the termination of the Petitioner. Hence, no further orders are required in this matter. 3. Sri Peeta Raman, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of and liberty may be given to the Petitioner to challenge the appellate orders. 4. Considering the submission made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to challenge the appellate orders, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:10.07.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.45754 of 2018 Dt.10.07.2025 Dinesh