1 APHC010062912026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 3815/2026 Between: 1. M.MOHAN REDDY,, S/O. PEDDA PULLAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O. PLOT NO.304, ARCHID SPRING APARTMENT, GAZETTED OFFICERS COLONY, KADAPA - 516003. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TECHNICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT., ANDHRA PRADESH.522237 2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH, DOOR NO 11-307, GARUDADRI KK TOWERS, SRI LAKSHMI NARASIMHA COLONY, NH-5SERVICE ROAD NEAR DR.NTR VIDHYA SEVA TRUST, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR-522503, ANDHRA PRADESH.522503 3. REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, TIRUPATI.517501 4. KSRM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, REP.BY ITS CORRESPONDENT, KADAPA - 516005. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, KSRM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KADAPA - 516005. 2 ...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 order or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned termination dated 22.10.2025 issued by 5th Respondent as arbitrary and discriminatory violative of article 14 and 21 of constitution of India and provisions of A.P Education Act and rules made under by setting aside the same and consequently direct the 4th and 5th respondents to reinstate me with continuity of service, back salary, attendant benefits with interest @12percent p.a and grant costs of the proceedings and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 may be pleased to suspend the impugned order dated 22.10.2025 of the 5th Respondent and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M PITCHAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES III The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in issuing the impugned termination proceedings dated 22.10.2025, by the 5th respondent as arbitrary and discriminatory violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the 3 Constitution of India and against the provisions of A.P. Education Act, 1982 and the Rules made thereunder and set aside the same. 2. Notice was served on the 4th respondent and filed proof of service. But, the 4th respondent has not chosen to appear and contest the matter. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the termination of the services of the petitioner vide the impugned proceedings dated 22.10.2025, issued by the respondent No.5 are contrary to the provisions of Section 79 of A.P. Education Act, 1982 and the Rules made thereunder. 4. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court about the order dated 11.07.2023, passed by this Court in W.P.No.35773 of 2022, wherein this Court has considered the identical issue and passed the following order: “16. Considering the submissions made and on perusing the record, it is clear that Section 79 (1) of the Act starts with the sentence that “No teacher or member of the non-teaching staff employed in any private institution”. Hence, the above proviso of Section 79 (1) of the Act, clearly indicates that it is applicable to all teaching and non-teaching staff of a private educational institution. Hence, the private educational institution is not an exception. Also, it is strange to note that in fact by applying Section 79, the respondent No.4 has requested the respondent No.3 vide proceedings dated 27.04.2021, the permission to take action against the petitioner. The contents of the respondent No.4 vide letter dated 27.04.2021 reads as follows:- “Hence, we request you kindly approve our proposals of imposing penalty of dismissal from service of Dr.T.Prithvi Raj as per education 4 act 1982 under section 79 and college byelaws we haven’t any workload of Telugu”. When the respondent No.4 has invoked the Section 79 of the Act vide letter dated 27.04.2021 and requested the respondent No.3 permission for imposing penalty against the petitioner; now he is taking u-turn and saying that the 12 said provisions is not applicable to the respondent No.4/college. The case law referred by the respondents is not applicable to the facts of this case. As per the Section 79 (1) of the Act, clearly demonstrates that if any private educational institution wants to initiate action against their employees (both teaching and non-teaching) for dismissal, removal or reduction in rank or suspension they have to obtain clear permission from the competent authority.” 17. No doubt, it is clear that in the present case respondent No.4 had passed an impugned order dated 01.09.2022 without obtaining the permission from the competent authority. Accordingly, the same is declared as contrary to the proviso of Section 79(1) of the Act and accordingly, it was set aside and further directing the respondent No.4 to take immediate action as per the directions issued by the respondent No.3 dated 20.09.2022 by reinstating the petitioner into the service with all consequential benefits. 18. With the above said directions, the present Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.” 5. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as against the order dated 11.07.2023, passed by this Court in W.P.No.35773 of 2022, a Writ Appeal No.828 of 2023 has been filed and the Division Bench of this Court has dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the single Judge. 6. Considering the submissions and on perusal of both the orders in writ petition and as well as in writ appeal, the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same lines by setting aside the impugned termination proceedings dated 5 22.10.2025, issued by the 5th respondent as the same is contrary to the provisions of Section 79 of A.P. Education Act, 1982 and the Rules made thereunder. 7. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 8. Registry is directed to tag the order dated 11.07.2023, passed by this Court in W.P.No.35773 of 2022 and as well as the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.828 of 2023 along with the order of the present writ petition. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _____________ D. RAMESH,J Date:06.03.2026 Gk. 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH 40 WRIT PETITION No.3815 OF 2026 Date:06.03.2026 Gk