^ . IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVi (Special Original Jurisdiction) | THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31279 OF 2018 Between: K. Suhasini, W/o. N.Guraiah, aged about 29 years, Occ. Anganwadi helper, Anganwadi Centre, Ponnampalli, Muddanuru Project, YSR Kadapa District., ,R/o.Ponnampalli post, Mylavaram Mandal, YSRKadapa Dist., Andhra Pradesh., ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its the Principal Secretary, Women and Child Welfare Dept., A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur Dist., 2. The Commissioner, Women and Child Welfare Dept., Vijayawada, Krishna District 3. The District Collector, YSR Kadapa, YSR Kadapa Dist., 4. The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency, YSR Kadapa District 5. The Child Development Project Officer (ICDS), Women and Child Welfare Development, Muddanuru YSR Kadapa District 6. K. Vasavi, w/o BobburiSrinivas Occ.Anganwadi helper, Anganwadi Centre, Ponnampalli, Muddanuru Project, YSR Kadapa District., R/o. Ponnampalli post, Mylavaram Mandal, YSR Kadapa Dist., Andhra Pradesh ...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 an appropriate Writ Order or orders. Direction or Direction more particulars one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring action against the 1 to 5 respondents in appointing 6th Respondent as Anganwadi helper in Anganwadi Centre, Ponnampalli village Mylavaram Mandal Muddanuru Project YSR kadapa district in the place of petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and contrary to the law laid down by the Honourable Apex court and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner service bnd pass such other or further orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case lA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 all further proceedings including the appoint of 6th Respondent of as Anganwadi helper Anganwadi centre Muddunur project YSR Kadapa and allow the petitioner to worker in the same place pending writ petition and pass such brdbrs this Honourable court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A RAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondents No.l to 5: GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE (AP) Counsel for the Respondent No:6: SRI VENKAT REDDY KODUMURY The Court made the following: Order f APHC010648552018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TYVO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 31279/2018 Between: K. Suhasini, ...PETITIONER AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: l.A RAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): l.GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE(AP) 2.VENKAT REDDY KODUMURY The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: ”... to issue an appropriate Writ Order or orders Direction or Direction more particulars one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring action against the 1 to 5 respondents in appointing 6^^ Respondent as Anganwadi helper in Anganwadi Centre, Ponnampalli village, Mylavaram mandal Muddanuru Project, YSR kadapa district in the place of petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and contrary to the law laid down by the Honourable Apex court and consequently, direct the respondents to continue the petitioner -service and pass such other orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 2. Heard A.Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for respondents. Perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner worked as an Anganwadi Helper and without giving proper opportunity, she was ! terminated; from service. ) 2 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader woui^ submit that thv petitioner failed to attend duty for three months and due to her unauthorised absence, three Memos have been issued seeking her explanation. The petitioner submitted her explanation and the respondent authorities were not satisfied with her explanation. The Respondent No.5 conducted enquiry and after obtaining approval from the District Selection Committee, the petitioner was terminated from service as per governing rules and law. Learned Asst. Government Pleader prays for dismissal of the Writ Petition. 5. Considering the submissions and a fair look at the material on record, it is not the case where the petitioner was not given an opportunity to explain the reasons for unauthorised absence for three months. It may have a great impact on performance of Anganwadi Centre, which is meant for the welfare of the children and pregnant women. 6. Be that as it may, after conducting enquiry and considering the explanation of the petitioner and after obtaining the approval from the District Welfare Committee, the petitioner was terminated from service as per the governing rules and law. It brooks no interference of this Court whi[e exercising the jurisdiction under Article 22(3 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 1. One CC to SRI A RAJENDRA BABU Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCS to GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE (AP), High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. One CC to SRI VENATA REDDY KODUMURY, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies gsg HIGH COURT DATED: 10/04/2025 ORDER OF WP.No.31279of2018 S f 3 OCT 2125 S Current Section ^ DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS