1 APHC010499202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 26332/2025 Between: 1. D JAYAPRAKASH, S/O D.JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 33 YRS STAFF ASSISTANT, DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., CHITTOOR,R/O 28-16,KOTHA INDLU PUNGANUR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETAIY, FOOD AND AGRICULTURE (COOPERATION) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER CUM ENQUIRY OFFICER, CHITTOOR. CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE CHITTOOR DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD, (CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. L J VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SURAGANI VIJAYA KUMAR 2. GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.26332 of 2025 ORDER: In the present writ petition, the order of removal issued vide proceedings in Rc.No.Est./884/Removal/2025-26, dated 12.09.2025 by Respondent No.4 is called in question. 2. The Petitioner was appointed as Staff Assistant by the 4th Respondent - Chittoor District Co-operative Central Bank Limited vide its proceedings dated 13.07.2020 on compassionate appointment after the death of his father who was working as Staff Assistant in the Respondent-Bank and died on 06.10.1997. 3. While so, the Respondent No.3 had directed the Petitioner with regard to an enquiry under Section 51 of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. Accordingly, the Petitioner appeared on 21.03.2025 before the Respondent No.3. 4. While so, on 12.09.2025, the Petitioner was removed from service by Respondent No.4 on the basis of an enquiry conducted under Section 51 of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 with regard to allegations levelled against the 4 previous Managing Committee of the Chittoor District Co- operative Central Bank Limited. Hence, the writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that no notice was issued to the Petitioner and straightaway the order of termination was issued contrary to the Discipline and Appeal Rules of the Respondent-Bank. The further contention is that the Section 51 report cannot be the sole basis for removal as the report is one dimensional and relied upon a judgment of this Court in V.Kodandaramaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh vide W.P.No.4899 of 2019. 6. Sri S.Vijay Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent-Bank would submit that the Respondent-Bank would conduct a disciplinary enquiry against the Petitioner in terms of the Discipline and Appeal Rules and appropriate orders will be passed thereon. 7. In the light of the submissions made, the impugned order of removal issued vide proceedings in Rc.No.Est./884/Removal/ 2025-26, dated 12.09.2025 by Respondent No.4 is set aside leaving it open to the Respondent-Bank to conduct an enquiry as 5 per the Discipline and Appeal Rules provided in the Staff Service Regulations of the Respondent-Bank and the Petitioner shall be reinstated into service forthwith. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 24.09.2025 Ivd 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.26332 of 2025 Dated 24.09.2025 Ivd