APHC010089602018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Hjijs FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No: 4053 OF 2018 Between: S. Seshnna, S/o Late S. Pullanna, Aged about 54 years, Junior Lineman (Contract basis) O/o. The Assistant Engineer, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Nandikotkur Jupadu Bungalow, Kurnool District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited (APSPDCL), rep. By its Chairman & Managing Director, Kurnool, A.P. 2. The Chief General Manager, (HRD), A.P.S.P.D.C.L Kurnool, A.P. 3. The Superintending Engineer (Operation), A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Kurnool, AP. 4. The Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Kurnool, 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by declaring the action of the 4 respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner on the directions of the higher authority without conducting any enquiry vide impugned Memo No. DEE/O/KNL/JAO/Adm/EL/D.No. 195 dated 27-12-2017 as being arbitrary, illegal, opposed to principles of natural justice, stigmatic, discriminatory and in th 1!—«ff violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further be pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled to be retained and continued in service as Contract Junior Lineman with all Consequential benefits. 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 suspend the impugned Memo No. DEE/O/KNL/JAO/Adm/EL/D.No. 195 dated 27-12-2017 issued by the 4**^ respondent and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Contract Junior Lineman in the interest of justice. lA No: 2 OF 2018 Between: 1. The Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited (APSPDCL), rep. By its Chairman and Managing Director, Kurnool, A.P. 2. The Chief General Manager, (FIRD), A.P.S.P.D.C.L Kurnool, A.P. 3. The Superintending Engineer (Operation), A.P.S.P.D.C.L. A.P. 4. The Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Kurnool, A.P. Kurnool, ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND S. Seshnna, S/o Late S. Pullanna, Aged about 54 years. Junior Lineman (Contract basis) O/o. The Assistant Engineer, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Nandikotkur Jupadu Bungalow, Kurnool District. ...RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONER 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 vacate the interim order made in lA No.1 of 2018 in WP No.4053 if 2018 dated 22.02.2018. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. LINGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA, SC FOR APSPDCL The Court made the following order: APHC010089602018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 4053/2018 Between: 1.S. SESHNNA,, S/0 LATE S. PULLANNA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, JUNIOR LINEMAN (CONTRACT BASIS) 0/0. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., NANDIKOTKUR JUPADU BUNGALOW, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COM OF A P, THE SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED (APSPDCL), REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KURNOOL, A.P. 2.THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, (FIRD), A.P.S.P.D.C.L KURNOOL, A.P. 3.THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER OPERATION, A.P.S.P.D.C.L. KURNOOL,AP. 4.THE DIVISIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER OPERATION, A.P.S.P.D.C.L.,, KURNOOL, AP. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 4th respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner on the directions of the higher 2 authority without conducting any enquiry vide impugned Memo No. DEE/O/KNL/JAO/Adm/EL/D.No. 195 dated 27-12-2017 as being arbitrary, illegal, opposed to principles of natural justice, stigmatic, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further be pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled to be retained and continued in service as Contract Junior Lineman with all Consequential benefits and to pass 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 suspend the impugned Memo No. DEE/O/KNL/JAO/Adm/EL/D.No. 195 dated 27-12-2017 issued by the 4th respondent and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Contract Junior Lineman in the interest of justice and to pass lA NO: 2 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 vacate the interim order made in lA No.1 of 2018 in WP No.4053 if 2018 dated 22.02.2018 Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.D LINGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL 2.. The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 4503/2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for; “...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 4th respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner on the directions of the higher authority without conducting impugned DEE/0/KNUJAO/Adm/EUD.No.195 dated 27-12-2017 as being arbitrary, illegal, opposed to principles of natural justice, stigmatic, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further be pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled to be retained and continued in service as Contract Junior Lineman with all Consequential benefits and to pass..” vide Memo No. any enquiry 2. Heard Sri D. Linga Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Venkata Rama Rao Kota learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is no more. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that in 4. compliance of the interim orders passed by this Court in I.A.No.01 of 2018 dated 22.02.2018, the individual was reinstated into service. Now the petitioner is no more, the Court may pass appropriate orders in this matter. 5. In reply, the learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the interim orders are in force, the impugned order would not be in existence. Now that the petitioner is no more, the respondent-authorities cannot take any 4 action. Learned Counsel would further submit that making the interim order as absolute, the petition may be disposed of. For ready reference, it is beneficial to extract the interim order passed 6. by this Court dated 22.02.2018 which is as hereunder: “The impugned order terminating the services of the petitioner though preceded by a show cause notice to which the petitioner submitted explanation contains no reasons why the explanation of the petitioner was not accepted. It is settled law that giving of reasons is a part of the principle of natural justice and the same are totally absent In the present case and the impugned order shocks the conscience of the Court. So, prime facie, the impugned order cannot be sustained. In these circumstances, there shall be interim suspension as prayed for. 7. In the light of the interim order passed by this Court, as rightly put by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order prime facie is not sustainable. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Legal Representatives of the petitioner are entitled to get any benefits regarding the employment of the petitioner. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR jr ^ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Chairman & Managing Director, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited (APSPDCL), Kurnool, A.P. 2. The Chief General Manager, (FIRD), A.P.S.P.D.C.L Kurnool, A.P. The Superintending Engineer (Operation), A.P.S.P.D.C.L. 3. Kurnool AP. 4. The Divisional Electrical Engineer Operation, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Kurnool, A.P. One CC to Sri D.Linga Rao, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri Venkata Rama Rao Kota, SC FOR APSPDCL Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies. 5. 6. 7. gi HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2025 ^ t 8 JUL 2025 , ORDER WP No.4053 OF 2018 CO is^^utrentSectigiJj^^/ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS