Dismissed

N Nagalakshmi v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Nov 2024WP/27133/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the respondents' alleged arbitrary interference preventing petitioners from working as Village Organization Assistants. The High Court relied on the 2019 SERP circular mandating non-interference and was satisfied that officials were not interfering, leading to disposal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents 3 to 6 not to interfere with the petitioners discharging duties as VOAs.

N Nagalakshmi Vs the State of Ap — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

[3331]

¶2

APHC010521342024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

SATURDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 27133/2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

N NAGALAKSHMI, W/O.N. MADHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, V.A.O. R/O. CHINTALAPALEM VILLAGE, ZARUGUMILLI MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶10

KUPPALA AKHILA,, W/O. MADAN KUMAR, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, V.A.O, ZARUGUMILLI VILLAGE SOCIETY ZARUGUMILLI VILLAGE AND MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶11

G. UMAMAHESWARI,, W/O.MARUTHI VARAPRASAD AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, V.A.O. R/O. CHINTALAPALEM VILLAGE, ZARUGUMILLI MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶12

...PETITIONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI CAPITAL CITY GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE SOCIETY FOR ELIMINATION OF RURAL POVERTY DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 2NDFLOOR, NTR ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK PANDIT NEHRU BUS STATION, VIJAYAWADA

¶16

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DRDA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE

¶17

Page 2 of 7

¶18

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶19

THE AREA COORDINATOR, SERF, KONDEPI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶20

THE ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER, SERF, ZARUGUMALLI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT

¶21

THE CLUSTER COORDINATOR, SERF ZARUGUMALLI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order of Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not allowing the petitioners to work as Village Organization Assistants in respective groups as mentioned in Annexure, even though their tenure is in vogue, without issuing any notice, order or communication, as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to work in their respective groups as mentioned in the Annexure, as Village Organization Assistants till they complete their tenure as per the resolutions of their respective groups in the Villages, and to pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶25

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 Respondents to allow the Petitioners to work in their respective groups as Village Organization Assistants till they complete their tenure as per the resolutions of their respective groups in the Villages, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶27

1.HANUMANTHA RAO BACHINA

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶30

Page 3 of 7

¶31

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶32

The Court made the following:

¶33

:: ORDER ::

¶34

Heard Sri B.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appeared for the respondents.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were elected as VOAs by resolutions passed by the members of respective Societies. The petitioners have been discharging their duties without any remarks. Learned counsel also would submit that after the change of the Government, respondents 3 to 6 are interfering with the petitioners discharging duties.

¶36

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services, on oral instructions would submit that the official respondents are not interfering with the discharging duties of the petitioner as VOA given the Circular No.647/SERP/IB/2019 dated 29.08.2019 issued by Principal Secretary, SERP.

¶37

The Societies where the petitioners have been discharging duties, as VOAs, are registered under Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995. Individual or Cooperative societies intending to form into Cooperative Societies under the aforementioned Act shall frame by-laws conforming to the principles of cooperation. The membership of the society shall be voluntary and without restrictions of any social, political, rational, or religious discrimination to all persons who can make use of its services and are willing to accept the responsibilities of membership. Members of primary Cooperative Societies shall enjoy equal rights of voting and participation in decisions affecting their Cooperative Societies. Section 4 of the Act speaks about the registration of the society and Section 5 prescribes that the society is a body corporate.

¶38

Page 4 of 7

¶39

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶40

The members of the society, normally, elect one among them as Village Organization Assistant, by a resolution and pay salary to the said individual. The Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty, Department of Rural Development, State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its CEO, is constituted by the State to implement the schemes for the elimination of rural poverty as proposed by the Union of India as well as the Government of Andhra Pradesh, by issuing circulars from time to time, regarding the appointment of Village Organization Assistants, qualifications, the procedure for selection, termination, method of payment, duties, and obligations. One of those circulars is circular No.64-/SERP/IB/2018 dated 26.11.2018. Thereafter, another Circular No.64-7/SERP/IB/2019 dated 29.08.2019 was issued by the Principal Secretary, SERP.

¶41

A perusal of the 2019 circular would manifest that to alleviate poverty and for women empowerment, 27,841 societies were formed in terms of the provisions of A.P.Mutually Aided Co-operative Societies Act, 1995; that those societies are autonomous bodies; that selection, removal, and duties of VOA etc., are within the purview of the members of the Society; that the duties and responsibilities of the Staff of the Village Organization are described in Section 25 of the Act; that the staff members of the Village Organization are answerable and accountable to the Village Organization and their appointment, removal, and performance of duties, are as per the bye-laws, rules and regulations framed by the Executive Committee of the Village Organization.

¶42

The said circular further prescribes that the staff of the CBO/Project should work for development and to achieve financial stability of the Village Organization and they should cooperate and facilitate the development of the Village Organization and shall not influence or interfere with the decisions of the society. (emphasis is mine)

¶43

Page 5 of 7

¶44

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶45

The circular further prescribes that the staff members of the Village Organization should not indulge in the decision-making process and that the appointments, removal, duties, and responsibilities of Sangamitra/VOA/Animator, are to be done by the Village Organization . As per the note in the circular, dated 29.08.2019, it was clarified that no other circulars be issued at the district level. Circular dated 29.08.2019, will be in force till another circular is issued.

¶46

Thus, as seen from the aforementioned circular, the appointment/selection of VOA and their discharge of duties, the official respondents have nothing to do with that procedure. The members of the Society got the right either to elect/appoint or remove of VOA. If any VOA is removed by a resolution of the Society, the remedy of that individual is in a different forum but not a writ petition. The aforementioned circular issued by the Principal Secretary commands no interference of the officials with the society's decision-making process except to facilitate.

¶47

The instructions of the learned Assistant Government pleader would manifest that the officials are not interfering. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services would submit that the circular dated 29.08.2019 is in force to date.

¶48

Since an averment was made in the affidavit that, respondents 3 to 6 are interfering with the discharging duties, this Court, on instructions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, intends to dispose of the writ petition.

¶49

Given the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the aforementioned circular issued by the Principal Secretary, SERP, and the oral instructions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of the learned counsel on either side, directing the respondents 3 to 6 not to interfere

¶50

Page 6 of 7

¶51

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶52

with the petitioners discharging duties as VOAs. However, this order will not preclude the respondent authorities from acting as per the Rules. No order as to costs.

¶53

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶54

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶55

Date: 23.11.2024 TVN

¶56

Page 7 of 7

¶57

SRS,J W.P.No.27133 of 2024

¶58

¶59

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶60

WRIT PETITION NO: 27133 of 2024

¶61

Dated: 23.11.2024 TVN

N Nagalakshmi v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Nagalakshmi v. the State of Ap

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

T. Chenchuramaiah Vs Sri Usha Rani

P Swarna Kumari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt Jonnalagadda Kataksham, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kandavalli Amit Kumar Vs the Life Insurance Corporation of India

Maddu Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

V Rajeswara Rao Vs the State of Ap