Disposed

K Padmavathi v. Collector and District

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Dec 2019WP/20072/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a petition alleging coerced resignation from an Anganwadi worker post. While rejecting allegations of coercion and noting past resignation acceptance, the Court directed the District Collector to dispose of the pending representation to withdraw the resignation.

What did the court decide?

Directing the District Collector to dispose of the pending representation to withdraw resignation expeditiously.

K Padmavathi Vs Collector and District — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2019)

¶1

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶2

Writ Petition No.20072 of 2019

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed “to declare the action of the 5^th respondent in obtaining coerced resignation dated 21.02.2019 from the petitioner without assigned any justified and valid reasons, nor such resignation is accepted nor communicated to the petitioner by the competent authorities, as illegal and arbitrary.”

¶5

Case of the petitioner is that, she was appointed as Anganwadi worker in the year 1987 and has completed 32 years of service; while so, in the month of February, 2019, when as she was not feeling well, she informed to the 5^th respondent that on resumption of duties she would complete the pending record work; but the 5^th respondent dictated a letter to the petitioner stating that she is submitting her resignation on her own will, for not completing the pending work and made the petitioner sign on the said resignation letter dated 21.02.2019 and the 5^th respondent collected an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- from other aspirant to give the post of the petitioner; so she filed representation dated 04.03.2019 before the 1^st respondent to continue the petitioner in service as Anganwadi worker by treating the resignation letter as withdrawn, but the sai d representation is not disposed of; she came to know that the 5^th respondent is making serious efforts to appoint another Anganwadi worker in the place of petitioner.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment in ‘ Union of India vs. Gopal Chadra Misra¹ ’ and submits that the resignation can be withdrawn before the same is accepted and seeks a direction to continue her as Anganwadi worker, by treating the resignation letter as nullity. She also relied upon the judgment in ‘ Power Finance Corporation Ltd. vs. Pramod Kumar

¶7

1 AIR 1978 SC 694

¶8

Bhatia² ’ and submits that the petitioner is entitled for salary from February, 2019 till reinstatement into service.

¶9

Learned Government Pleader passed on the written instructions of the 5^th respondent dated 01.12.2019 stating that the petitioner has tendered her resignation to the post of Anganwadi worker on 31.01.2019 out of her own will; the Sector Supervisor Grade-2 Hamsavaram Section has also counter-signed on the said resignation and submitted the same to the office; resignation letter of the petitioner was forwarded to the District Level Selection Committee through letter dated 15.09.2019 and the said Committee has accepted the resignation on 10.10.2019 and informed the Project Director through Memo dated 28.10.2019 and through mail on 19.11.2019; the said post was declared as clear vacancy; the 5^th respondent has not received any representation from the petitioner stating that the petitioner is withdrawing her resignation; the allegation that the 5^th respondent collected an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- is false.

¶10

As the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed representation dated 04.03.2019 before the District Collector (1^st respondent), if the said representation is received by the 1^st respondent and if the same is pending, the 1^st respondent is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably before filling up the post of Anganwadi worker, Hamsavaram-II.

¶11

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶12

__________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

¶13

Date: 12.12.2019 BSS

¶14

2 (1997)4 SCC 280

¶15

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶16

Writ Petition No.20072 of 2019

¶17

¶18

Date: 12.12.2019

¶19

BSS

K Padmavathi v. Collector and District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Padmavathi v. Collector and District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J v Ramanamma Vs the State of Ap

P.Gopala Krishna, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Bhyri Mohan Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

G. Sudhakar at Sudhakar Reddy Vs The A.P. Transmission Corporation Ltd.

M.Venkata Naga Madhavi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G RoOpa Devi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh