Disposed

Yarramati Padmamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Sept 2024WP/19446/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Field Assistant under MGNREGS alleged respondents barred her from duty without due process. Respondents stated they would not obstruct her. Court disposed the writ petition directing respondents not to interfere with her duties without following due process of law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 4 and 5 not to interfere with petitioner's duties as Field Assistant without due process of law.

Yarramati Padmamma Vs the State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 19446 OF 2024

¶7

Between;

¶8

YARRAMATI PADMAMMA, W/o. Seenaiah, aged about 40 yeai^ OccField Assistant, R/o. Kota Grama Panchayat Kota Mandal,^{TirupatiDistrict.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND 1

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by Principal Secretary, (Panchayatraj and Rural Development), Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶12

The Commissioner, Rural Development/State Programme^Coordinator of M.G. National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme^(MGNREGS) Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶13

The District Collector / District Programme Co-ordinator,^Tirupati District, Tirupati.

¶14

The Project Director, District Water Management Agency,^Tirupati, Tirupati District.

¶15

The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Kota Mandal,Tirupati District.

¶16

The Additional Programme Officer, MGNREGS, Kota Mandal,^Tirupati District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India^{prayingthatin}

¶19

/ the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{theHighCourtmay}

¶20

/ be pleased to issue the Writ order or Direction more^particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of^{theRespondentsNo.5} and 6, who has not allowing the petitioner to attend^{forhisdutyasfield} Assistant at Kothapatnam Gram Panchayat of Kota Mandal,^{TirupatiDistrict,} without following due procedure of law as illegal,^{arbitaryandagainstthe}

¶21

principles of natural Justice and violation Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and Consequently directing the Respondent Authorities to allow the petitioner for works as field Assistant for Kothapatnam Gram l^anchayat of Kota Mandal, Tirupati District.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

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 direct the respondent authorities to consider the request of the petitioner by allowing the petitioner to attend for duty as Field Assistant for Kolhapatnam Gram Panchayat of Kota Mandal, Tirupati District,. Pending disposal of the above writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. V ROOPESH KUMAR^REDDY

¶25

Counsel for the Respondents R.1: GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶26

Counsel for the Respondents R.2 to R.4 and R.6: Sri^{M.S.R.Chandra} Murthi Standing Counsel

¶27

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

APHC010354922024

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH r-iZiV-a AT AMARAVATI sTffJ: (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

[3331]

¶32

MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 19446/2024

¶36

Between:

¶37

Yarramati Padmamma ...PETITIONER

¶38

AND

¶39

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶41

1.V ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶43

1.GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶44

The Court made the following:

¶45

:: ORDER ::

¶46

The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 5 &

¶47

6 in not allowing the petitioner to discharge his duties as Field Assistant,

¶48

Page 2 of 4

¶49

SRS,J W.P.No.19446 of 2024

¶50

Kothapatnam Gram Panchayat, Kota Mandal, Tirupati District, without following due process, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri V.Roopesh Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for^{thepetitioner,} and Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondents 2 to 4 & 6, and Smt.B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent No.5.

¶51

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that^{thepetitionerwas} joined in the service as a Field Assistant in Kothapatnam^{GramPanchayat,} Kota Mandal, Tirupati District, under MGNREGS on 08.01.2021. He also would submit that respondents 5 & 6 directed the petitioner^nottoproceed with the work due to village politics.

¶52

Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel,^{oninstructionsof} the Project Director, DWMA Tirupati, would submit that^{theProjectDirectordid} not issue any oral or written instructions to respondents^{4&5.Healsowould} submit that respondents 4 & 5 will not obstruct the^{petitionerfromdischarging} duties as Field Assistant.

¶53

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the^Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission with the consent^{ofboththelearned} counsel, directing the respondents 4 & 5 not to interfere^{withthepetitioner’s}

¶54

Page 3 of 4

¶55

SRS,J W.P.No.19446 of 2024

¶56

discharging duties as Field Assistant, without following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶57

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{shallstandclosed.}

¶58

To.

¶59

SD/- P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC^ierroFFicER

¶60

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep.^ by

¶61

(Panchayatr^and Rural Development), Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi, Guntur District. ^

¶62

De''elopment/State, Programme Coordinator

¶63

Wjayawada Krishna (MGNREGS)

¶64

^ Dis1ricrTirupatr'^*°'^' District Programme Co-ordinator,^Tirupati

¶65

T,Yuparras’tricr‘"°'' Agency, Tirupati,

¶66

^ DiSrl^f Parishad Development Officer, Kota Mandal,Tirupati

¶67

Dislrict^''”"^' '"'■“S''®"’'"® 0"''=®''' MGNREGS, Kota^{Mandal,Tirupati}

¶68

One CC to SRI. V ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY Advocate [OPUCJ

¶69

Pradesh.

¶70

^ [OUT?^®'° IV ,High Court Of Andhra

¶71

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:09/09/2024

ORDER

ANDHS?^
2 0 JAN 2025 CO/;
•<s>
Current Section

¶76

WP.No.19446 of 2024

¶77

WRIT PETITION IS DISPOSED OF

Yarramati Padmamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yarramati Padmamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.G. Chandrasekhar Vs Sri Sumit Kumar

Adireddi China Appa Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kondeti Dasu Vs Sri S Naga Laksmi

Ganapa Thirumala Reddy Vs the State of Ap

Saripalli Kiran Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

J Amaravati Vs the State of Ap