APHC010615572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 31833/2025 Between: 1. V PARVATHI, W/O SEEMALA VENKATARAMANA, AGED. 39 YEARS, OCC. FIELD ASSISTANT (SUSPENSION),R/O. M. SINGUPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT,PALAKONDA MANDAL, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT). ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DIRECTOR CUM ADDITIONAL DISTRICT, PROGRAMME COORDINATOR OF MGNREGS, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT, (ERSTWHILE SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT). ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toPleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned proceedings in Rc.No.573/2024/DVC/Manyam, dt. 02.12.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent thereby suspended the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant working in M. Singupuram Gram Panchayat, Palakonda Mandal, Parvathipuram Manyam District, is illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to p. 2 the provisions of National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme Act, 2005 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings dt.02.12.2024 and direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service for the said post and pass IA 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 Pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings in Rc.No.573/2024/DVC/Manyam, dt. 02.12.2024 issued by the 2 respondent and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service in the post of Field Assistant working in M.Singupuram Gram Panchayat, Palakonda Mandal, Parvathipuram Manyam District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: p. 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 31833/2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the Proceedings dated 02.12.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2, placing the Petitioner temporarily out of employment vide Rc.No.573/2024/DVC/Manyam, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner is working as Field Assistant in M. Singupuram Gram Panchayat, Palakonda Mandal, Parvathipuram Manyam District (Erstwhile Srikakulam District). While so, a show-cause notice was issued on 20.08.2024 alleging that the Petitioner committed irregularities and the Petitioner called upon to explain his explanation thereto. Thereafter, the Petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 31.08.2024. However, the Respondent No.2, without considering the explanation submitted by the Petitioner, placed the Petitioner out of employment vide impugned Proceedings. 3. Heard Sri Srinivas Ambati, learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for Respondent No.1 and Sri M.S.R. Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in terms of Clause 13(B)(5) of the Field Assistants Human Resource Policy, the inquiry ought to be completed within thirty days. Though show-cause notice came to be issued on 20.08.2024, the inquiry has not been completed so far contrary to the aforesaid time lines and on top of it, the Respondents have now placed the p. 4 Petitioner under suspension, which is arbitrary and illegal. The counsel also relied on an order passed in similar circumstances by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.16643 of 2025. 5. Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, submits that the inquiry is going on and the same would be concluded within three (03) weeks from now. The further contention is that the guidelines are not statutory and even otherwise, no consequence is stated for non-compliance of the time frame of 30 days and therefore, the same cannot be said to be mandatory. The maintainability of the Writ Petition was also urged as the nature of job of the Petitioner is akin to Labour. 6. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of W.P.No.17608 of 2025 with a direction to the respondent No.2 to reinstate the Petitioner into service and conclude the enquiry after providing due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 18.11.2025 TVN p. 5 136 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.31833 OF 2025 Date: 18.11.2025 TVN