1 APHC010564022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 29752/2025 Between: Sana Venkata Subbaiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 29752 OF 2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the Proceedings dated 28.03.2025 issued vide Lr.No.EE/O/KDP/AEE/JC/Tech/F./D.No.1210/25, directing the Respondent No.7 Firm to remove the Petitioner from duty as Shift Operator at 33/11KV SS Duggayapalli in Vallur Operation Section, Kadapa, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner was appointed as Shift Operator on outsourcing basis through the Respondent No.7 i.e., the Agency, from January, 2024. By virtue of the impugned Proceedings, the Respondent No.7 was instructed to remove the Petitioner from the work as he does not have requisite qualification of ‘Certificate of Experience’ as per the Institute Records in Elector Sector. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent would submit that the Petitioner was not terminated on account of stigmatic grounds and as the Petitioner does not have the requisite qualification to work as a Shift Operator, the Respondent No. 7/employer was directed to remove the Petitioner from duty. 3 4. Heard the respective counsel. 5. As rightly contended by the learned Standing Counsel that there is no employer and employee relationship between them nor the impugned Order can be termed as stigmatic warranting any enquiry to be conducted before passing the impugned Order. 6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner does not dispute the fact that the Petitioner does not have the qualification of two years of training in the “Certificate of Experience” in the Elector Sector. 7. In that view, this Court does not find any merit in the Writ Petition. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 31.10.2025 eha 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 29752 OF 2025 Dt.31.10.2025 eha