IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV, (Special Original Jurisdiction) A FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 38554 OF 2022 Between: Saviti Brahma Mani, W/o. Talari Raju, aged about 47 years, R/o. D. No. 2-70, Turupu Pakalu Village, Tamarada Post, Peddapuram Mandal, Kakinada District, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its PrI. Secretary, Women Development and Child Welfare Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Kakinada District, Kakinada. 3. The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Department, Kakinada, Kakinada District, A.P. 4. The Child Development Project Officer, I.C.D.S. Project, Peddapuram Hanuman Temple Road, G. Ragampeta, Peddapuram, Kakinada District, A.P. ...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 Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent authorities in terminating the Petitioner from the post of AnganwadiWorker by issuing the impugned Termination Order vide Order No. 22/A/2021 dated 22.09.2022 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of law and consequently set aside the same and order the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner back into service as Angan\A/adi Worker by granting all attending benefits calculated from the date of suspension till date. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass an interim order by suspending the impugned Termination Order vide Order No. 22/A/2021 dated 22.09.2022 issued by the Respondent No.4, until disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 receive the rejoinder on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 : GP FOR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT & CHILD WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER V (C APHC010646812022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 38554/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER Saviti Brahma Mani, AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2.GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Narra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare. Challenging the action of the respondent authorities in terminating petitioner from the post of Anganwadi worker by issuing the impugned Order vide Order No.22/A/2021 dated 22.09.2022, the present 2. the Termination writ petition is filed. V. 2 3. It is contended that the petitioner was appointed as anganwadi worker in 1992. In 2022 she was terminated from service stating that a complaints were received from the villages against her.lt is stated that pursuant to a memo dated 23-12-2021 the petitioner has submitted her explanation to the allegations made therein. Thereafter one more Memo was issued on 1-07-2022 alleging that the petitioner has not been distributing the food to the beneficiaries of the anganwadi centre and to the pregnant women. The petitioner has submitted her explanation to the said Memo on 6-07-2022. Thereafter two more Memos were issued on similar allegations. Thereafter vide proceedings dated 22-09-2022 the petitioner was removed from service. 4. It is contended that the impugned order is passed without conducting any enquiry into the complaints said to have been received against her. And the proceedings have been issued acting on the directions of the Collector and as per the directions of the District Women and Child Welfare Department. 5. Considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that the same has been passed on the directions of the superior officers of the disciplinary authority. Further, no enquiry has been conducted into the allegations or complaints said to have been received against the petitioner. Thus, the impugned order is vitiated for not following the due procedure under law in terminating the petitioner's services. Further, the impugned order also suffers from non-application of mind by the disciplinary authority. 3 6. The impugned order does not reflect the application of mind by the disciplinary authority: but reflects the mind of the superior officer. Thus, the proceedings are vitiated for non-application of mind by the disciplinary authority and for non-conducting of the enquiry into the allegations made against the petitioner. 7. The impugned order in the writ petition is accordingly set aside. Liberty is granted to the respondents to pass appropriate orders afresh after conducting an enquiry by giving due opportunity to the petitioner. 8. The respondents are directed to pass orders afresh within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of the order. The respondents are The said directed to reinstate the petitioner without back wages, reinstatement will be subject to the outcome of the enquiry. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order 9. as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER ^ f^incipal Secretary, Women Development and Child Welfare aSS’ of Andhra Pradesh, A P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, 2. The District Collector, Kakinada District, Kakinada. Women and Child Development Department, Kakinada, Kakinada District, A.P. 4. The Child Development Project Officer, I.C.D.S. Project Peddaouram SfstdcT, Peddapuram, Kakinada ’ 5. One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Narra, Advocate [OPUC] ®' orAndhrVpra°des'h''[OUTf" Welfare, 7. Two CCS to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 8. Three C.D. Copies. Cnr To, High Court . [OUT] HIGH COURT DATED:28/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.38554 of 2022 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS