APHC010105302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 5500/2025 Between: P Kondaiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CH SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2 The Court made the following order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “…to issue writ or writs more particularly in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in permanently removing the petitioner from service as Field Assistant Kothapet Grampanchyat vide impugned proceedings Rc No.917/HR/Khajipeta/2024 dt.14-2-2025 without considering the explanation of the petitioner in proper perspective is illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and is gross violation of natural justice and cannot be justified in the eye of law and the consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits by setting aside the impugned proceedings Rc.No.917/HR/Khajipeta/2024 dt.14-2-2025 of the 4th respondent in the interest of Justice and pass such other order or orders.…” 2. The petitioner was appointed as Filed Assistant of C.Kothapeta Gram Panchayat, Khajipet Mandal, by proceedings dated 31.03.2006 and was assigned the work of implementation of NREGS Scheme. Basing on certain allegations and complaints received, the 4th respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 23.10.2024 calling for explanation, to which, the petitioner has submitted explanation on 30.10.2024 refuting the allegations made therein. On considering the said explanation and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, 4th respondent issued impugned proceedings dated 14.02.2025, removing the petitioner from service permanently. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 3 3. Heard Sri Ch.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent No.1, Sri Chandra Murthy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Sri Aparna Lakshmi, learned counsel for respondent No.5. 4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that the order impugned in the writ petition is appealable, and an appeal is provided to the Collector-3rd respondent under Clause 13(c) of the Field Assistant Human Resource Policy. Therefore, the petitioner, instead of approaching the 3rd respondent, filed the present writ petition and hence, the same is not entertainable. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner made certain submissions on the merits of the matter; however this Court is not inclined to go into the same, as there is an effective alternative remedy of appeal before the 3rd respondent. 6. In view of the availability of an alternative remedy, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to avail alternative remedy provided under Clause 13(c) of the Field Assistant Human Resource Policy. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 05.03.2025 KBN 4 99 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No.5500 of 2025 Date: 05.03.2025 KBN