APHC010191652012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 30591/2012 Between: Korru Veerraju, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V V SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: The petitioner was engaged as a field assistant during the year 2008 at Koyyuru Mandal, Vishakhapatnam District. A social audit was ordered on 02.11.2010 to be conducted from 15.11.2010 and a public hearing was held on 15.11.2010. Subsequently, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice, calling upon the petitioner to pay the alleged misappropriated amount. The petitioner was placed under suspension vide 2 proceedings dated 27.01.2010. Thereafter, vide proceedings dated 26.06.2012, the services of the petitioner were terminated. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was charged with eight allegations, and the social audit was conducted to probe into the alleged misappropriation of funds belonging to the NREG Scheme. It is submitted that the social audit indicated that the money was not withdrawn by anyone. Among the eights charges, Allegation Nos.3 and 6 were held against the petitioner, and the petitioner was found liable to refund Rs.782/- out of a total amount of Rs.2,768/-. An explanation was sought from the petitioner, and the petitioner submitted his explanation, the respondents issued the proceedings. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents did not consider the explanation properly and therefore, the impugned proceedings deserve to be set aside. 4. The respondents in their counter-affidavit submit that the petitioner had misappropriated a total amount of Rs.8,727/-, that a proper enquiry was conducted, and that the petitioner participated in the said enquiry. It is further submitted that a 3 public hearing was conducted, and the irregularities conducted by the petitioner were established. 5. It is also submitted that the impugned proceedings dated 26.06.2012 provided the petitioner with an opportunity to file an appeal before the District Collector. However, the petitioner did not avail himself of the remedy and instead approached this Court, challenging the said proceedings. 6. Without entering into the merits of the case or expressing any opinion on the allegations concerning the alleged misappropriation of funds, it is left open for the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority. 7. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 20.02.2025 NKA 4 224 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.30591 of 2012 Date: 20.02.2025 NKA