Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 524 (AP)

Raj Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2022-05-29

RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

body2022
JUDGMENT Ravi Cheemalapati, J. - The present Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: '...issue a writ or an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents, particularly the respondent No.2 in not implementing his own order in their proceeding No.87/aPDDSSST/admn/2019, dated 26.07.2021 through which they, the 24 DRP employees were decided to be reinstated into the service of the DRP's i.e., the petitioners as illegal and void and further be pleased to pass an order directing the respondents, particularly the respondent No.2, to reinstate the petitioners immediately into service by entrusting DRP work as per the proceedings mentioned above ....' 2. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they were appointed as District Resource Persons at andhra Pradesh Society for Social audit, accountability and Transparency (for short, 'aPSSaaT') by the Director, SSaaT for the purpose of Social audit, accountability and Transparency to ensure the autonomy and purity of the social audits and they worked as such without any fault or default and without any blemish on their part and to the satisfaction of the respondents. It is the further case of the petitioners that they were paid honorarium for their services and the same was enhanced from time to time and ultimately they were terminated illegally from the services without any prior notice by the respondents. It is the further case of the petitioners that since 2014, they made several representations to the Director of aPSSaaT about their illegal terminations and requesting the authorities to reinstate them into service and pursuant to their request to reinstate them into service, the Directors through proceedings No.87/ aPSSaaaT/ aDMN/2019, DaTED 26.07.2021, has considered their request on humanitarian grounds and decided to reinstate their services and though the respondents have issued proceedings dated 26.07.2021 by reinstating the petitioners into service but no work was entrusted till today. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 3. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit along with an application to vacate the interim order granted by this Court dated 22.10.2021, inter alia, contending that no reinstatement proceedings were issued by the 2nd respondent and the petitioners 1 to 12 and 14 to 19 and 21, 24 were terminated and resigned their services on various dates and the then former Director issued a suspension-cum-show cause notices relating to the petitioner Nos. 13 and 20 following due procedure laid down in the Code of Conduct and Disciplinary Rules. It is further stated in the counter that the earlier Director Sri G.Sreekanth upon completion of tenure of 3 years was completed duly and relieved from the said post and present director deponent herein has been appointed as Director under proceedings G.O.Rt.No.371, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (RD.II) Department, dated 05.07.2021 and he joined duty as Director on 13.07.2021. It is further contended the earlier Director has no power to issue reinstatement orders after relieving the post of Director on 05.07.2021 and accordingly prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. Heard, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao counsel for the petitioners and Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy learned standing counsel for the respondent No.2. 6. Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to the pleadings made in the writ petition, has contended that though the present director has been appointed, the earlier director has relieved from services only on 28.07.2021 and as such he has power to reinstate the petitioners into service and the re-instatement order dated 26.07.2021 holds good. The learned counsel for the petitioners, in further elaboration to his contention drew attention of this court to the relieving proceedings, which was filed material papers, along with a written memo. 7. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel draw the attention of this court to G.O.Rt.No.371, dated 05.07.2021 which was placed on record as material paper. a perusal of the G.O.Rt.No.371 para No.3 reads as follows: 'Government after careful examination of the recommendations of the Committee, hereby post Sri M.Jagadeesh Kumar as Director, Society for Social audit, accountability and Transparency (SSaaT) for a term of three years duly relieving Sri G.Srikanth, from the post of Director, SSaaT-aP.' 8. The learned Standing counsel further draw the attention of this court to the joining report of the present Director i.e., deponent herein addressed to the Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj & Rural Development, a.P.Secretariat, amaravathi, dated 13.07.2021. The same reads as follows: 'In obedience to the orders of the Principal Secretary to Govt., Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, I, M.Jagdish Kumar, who was posted as Director, SSaaT-aP here by submit my joining report for your kind perusal and further course of action'. 9. The same reads as follows: 'In obedience to the orders of the Principal Secretary to Govt., Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, I, M.Jagdish Kumar, who was posted as Director, SSaaT-aP here by submit my joining report for your kind perusal and further course of action'. 9. The learned standing counsel, in further elaboration, also draw the attention of this court to the agreement entered by the present Director wherein Para-17 states that the agreement shall remain in force from 13.07.2021 and expires on 12.07.2024 in terms of G.O.Rt.No.371 Pr & RD (RD.II) Dept., dt.05.07.2021. The tenure under this agreement shall be in force, in between, and including, these two dates and accordingly submitted that the present Director has already joined into service by virtue of the agreement and as on the date the earlier Director has no power to issue re-instatement proceedings. 10. In the present situation, since the relief sought by the petitioners is only a direction to the 2nd respondent to implement the orders of re-instatement of the petitioners pursuant to the orders dated 26.07.2021, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court, with the consent of both the counsel, without going of the merits of the case, deems it fit and appropriate dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: (a) The 2nd respondent herein is directed to pass appropriate orders on the request made by the petitioners for their reinstatement pursuant to the orders dated 26.07.2021 strictly as per law and this exercise shall be completed within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (b) The 2nd respondent is further directed to communicate the said decision to the petitioners and petitioners are liberty to question the said orders, in the event it went against them. (c) Till such exercise is completed, the interim orders passed by this court dated 22.10.2021 remains in force. (d) Needless to observe that any observation so made in this order will not come in the way while considering the petitioners' case. 11. as a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.