APHC010639982013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24380/2013 Between: 1.PANEM RAMESH, S/O VENKATESWARLU,, OCC: FIELD ASSISTANT (UNDER TERMINATION), NREGS, R/O ANUMULLANKA VILLAGE, GAMPALAGUDEM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY, REP. BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT, VIJAYAWADA. 2.THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER/, PROGRAMME OFFICER, N.R.E.G.S., GAPPALAGUDEM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...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 toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 1st respondent issued in Notice No.49/2009/DVC, dated 26.6.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.14121 of 2009 and batch dated 7.7.2010 and also contrary to Circular No.143/SRDS/HR Manual/2009, dated 27.1.2010 and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Field Assistant under NREG Scheme to the Anumullanka Village, Gamppalagudem Mandal, Krishna District with all consequential and incidential benefits IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 30004 OF 2013 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 proceedings of the 1st respondent issued in Notice No.49/2009/DVC, dated 26.6.2013 pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P V V SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.24380 OF 2013 ORDER : 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.06.2013 passed by the 1st respondent as illegal. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that the order passed by the 1st respondent is appealable before the Appellate Authority within a period of 30 days. It is submitted that, instead of filing the appeal, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. It is further submitted that the petitioner was on a contract basis and the term of engagement has also expired. 3. Considering the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dated 09.03.2026 KGM 3 99 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.24380 OF 2013 Dated 09.03.2026 KGM