Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 18 (AP)

K. Kumar, S/o. Arjanna v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2022-01-04

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

body2022
ORDER : Prashant Kumar Mishra, J These writ petitions were originally filed as O.As before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, challenging the Memos dated 26.04.2019 issued by the Executive Engineer, Godavari Head Works Division, Dowlaiswaram, East Godavari District, whereby their services have been terminated without giving any opportunity of hearing and in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they were appointed as Helpers on NMR basis during the year 1984 and 1985 and have been regularly employed thereafter in the said capacity. When their services were discontinued in the year 1991, they preferred W.P.No.16197 of 1991 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which was disposed of on 03.04.1995 directing the respondents therein to examine their claim with reference to their absorption in the work charged establishment. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred O.As, one such being O.A.No.2494 of 2006, which was disposed of on 08.12.2009 directing the respondents therein to take the services of the applicants. Pursuant to which, they were reinstated in October, 2010 and since then they are working as NMR workers. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred O.A.No.2778 of 2018 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal questioning the action of the respondents in not regularizing their services and not paying regular scale of pay attached to the post. Vide order dated 14.12.2018, the Tribunal directed the respondents therein to pay minimum in the time scale attached to the post in which they are working along with D.A., and also directed to pay arrears w.e.f. 01.11.2016 as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148 . 3. It is further case of the petitioners that when the order was not complied with, they were compelled to prefer contempt applications before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in which notices were issued to the respondents. Therefore, as a counterblast, the impugned memos have been issued to the petitioners terminating their services in utter violation of principles of natural justice. 4. It is argued that in the impugned memos, though the petitioners were shown as seasonal workers, the salary particulars filed at Page No.31 to 42 of the material papers would go to show that they are working as NMR workers but not as seasonal workers. 4. It is argued that in the impugned memos, though the petitioners were shown as seasonal workers, the salary particulars filed at Page No.31 to 42 of the material papers would go to show that they are working as NMR workers but not as seasonal workers. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the NMR workers cannot be terminated without following the principles of natural justice, more so, when they are working on regular basis. 5. Per contra, Mr. K. Bheema Rao, learned Government Pleader for Services-III, would draw our attention to the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2494 of 2006, dated 08.12.2009 and contend that the Tribunal directed the respondents therein to take services of the applicants as seasonal workers as and when work is available. Thus, according to him, the petitioners are seasonal workers and their claim as NMR workers is not at all justified. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the material on record. 7. It is significant to note that when the interim order dated 10.05.2019 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in the O.A.Nos.721, 719, 720, 722, 717, 718 of 2019 is not complied with, the petitioners preferred W.P.Nos.15907, 15908, 15934, 15935, 15936 and 15968 of 2019 seeking implementation of the interim order and the said writ petitions were disposed of on 13.11.2019 with a direction that the order of the Tribunal be now implemented by the respondents within a period of two months from the date of communication of the order. In the interim order dated 10.05.2019, the operation of the impugned memos dated 26.04.2019 whereby the services of petitioners were terminated has been suspended and the respondents therein were directed to continue the applicants in their respective posts with the same terms and conditions. 8. While so, when the final order was passed by this Court came to be violated, the petitioners preferred contempt cases, which are heard today along with the writ petitions. In the course of hearing of the contempt cases, we directed the respondents to produce the original record to demonstrate the status of the petitioners before their termination. 8. While so, when the final order was passed by this Court came to be violated, the petitioners preferred contempt cases, which are heard today along with the writ petitions. In the course of hearing of the contempt cases, we directed the respondents to produce the original record to demonstrate the status of the petitioners before their termination. The records produced before this Court clearly demonstrate that immediately prior to termination of the petitioners, i.e., prior to 26.04.2019, they were paid salary by treating them as NMR workers in March, 2019, thus there is no substance in the arguments advanced by the learned Government Pleader for Services-III that the petitioners were working as seasonal workers and not as NMR workers. 9. The impugned memos refer to the petitioners as seasonal workers, which is factually incorrect and contrary to the material on record. The status of NMR worker being superior to seasonal worker, inasmuch as, a seasonal worker can be provided work as and when it is available and NMR worker is employed on regular basis on the terms and conditions applicable to NMR worker. The termination of services of NMR worker, without following the principles of natural justice, cannot be sustained being in violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, we have no hesitation to quash the impugned memos dated 26.04.2019 issued by the Executive Engineer, Godavari Head Works Division, Dowlaiswaram, East Godavari District; and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners as NMR workers. It is ordered accordingly. 10. The petitioners shall be paid salary as NMR workers from the date of their termination till they were allowed to join, as has been submitted before this Court in the course of hearing of the contempt cases. 11. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are allowed and the contempt cases stand disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.