Kavuri Sudha Rani, Vs the State of Ap

¶1

\

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI / (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1519 OF 2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

Kavuri Sudha Rani, W/o. Anandakumar, Age 25 years, Occ Formerly Anganwadi Worker, Rio. H. No. 6-50, Thugadamvaripalli, H/o. Podalakunttapalli, Somala Mandal, Chittoor District.

...PETITIONER(S)

/

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary,^Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Krishna District.

¶13

The District Collector, Chittoor District.

¶14

The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency. Chittoor.

¶15

Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Chowdepalli, Chittoor District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS "

¶17

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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proc. No.1516/A3/2018^dt.19-01- 2019 issued by Respondent No.3 terminating the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same with all consequential benefits such as continuity of service, payment of wages.

¶18

X

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶20

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 grant interim suspension of the Proc. No. 1516/A3/2018 dated 19-01-2019 issued by Respondent No.3 to continue the Petitioner as Anganwadi worker pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶21

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶22

Between:

¶23

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary,^Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Krishna District.

¶24

The District Collector, Chittoor District.

¶25

The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Aqencv Chittoor.

¶26

Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Chowdepalli, Chittoor District.

¶27

X

¶28

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶29

AND

¶30

Kavuri Sudha Rani, W/o. Anandakumar, Age 25 years, Occ Formerly Anganwadi Worker, Rio. H. No. 6-50, Thugadamvaripalli,“ H/o. Podalakunttapalli, Somala Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶31

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶32

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 vacate the interim order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in W.P.No. 1519 of 2019 dt 16.03.2019 in the interest of justice.

¶33

X

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI C. M. R. VELU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 : GP FOR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT & CHILD WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶35

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶36

%

¶37

APHC010032152019

¶38

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3396] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶39

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶40

PRESENT

¶41

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶42

WRIT PETITION No. 1519 of 2019

¶43

Between: Kavuri Sudha Rani, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: l.CM RVELU

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S): l.GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2.GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE(AP)

¶45

The Court made the following:

¶46

ORDER:

¶47

This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{IndiatoissueaWritof} Mandamusto declare the Proc.No.l516/A3/2018, dated^{19.01.2019issued} by respondent No.3 terminating the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Principles of natural justice and consequently,^setasidethe same with all consequential benefits such as continuity^ofserviceand payment of wages.

¶48

Brief facts of the case:

¶49

i) Petitioner is an Anganwadi Worker working at Thungadamvaripalli Anganwadi Centre, ICDS Project,^Chowdepalli, Somala Mandal, Chittor District since 1992. One Smt.T.Janaki joined as Aya in

¶50

2

¶51

2017 in the same centre, where the Petitioner is working and she hails from the same village.

¶52

ii) Since the said Smt.T.Janaki, is the native of the village, she instigated the villagers to revolt against the Petitioner and obtained signatures of the villagers and gave complaint on 01.12.2018 to respondent No.4 against the Petitioner on the ground that she is not distributing the essentials to the women and children in the village.

¶53

iii) On 04.12.2018, respondent No.4 inspected the village, checked the stock and found that 10 packets of dates were excess. By the time. Smt.T.Janaki along with villagers came there and gave a complaint against the Petitioner and submitted that as if the petitioner tendered resignation letter signed by the villagers. The signature of the Petitioner is in Telugu but the Petitioner never signs in Telugu and she signs in English,

¶54

iv) Respondent No.4 submitted a report dated 06.12.2018 to the respondent No.3. Basing on the same, respondent No.3 issued the showcause notice dated 11,12.2018 referring the note orders of respondent No.4. Petitioner through her counsel requested to submit the copy of the said note orders to enable her to submit her explanation. Petitioner through her counsel preferred appeal dated 19.01.2019 under Right to Information Act. Respondent No.3 furnished information on 24.01.2019.

¶55

V) By impugned Proceedings dated 19.01.2019, the respondent No.3 terminated the Petitioner from service with immediate effect.

¶56

3

¶57

%

¶58

vi) The case of the Petitioner is that the respondent^authorities without conducting any enquiry, without furnishing^{thematerialdocument} to enable her to submit her explanation to the show^{causenoticeissued} by the respondent No.3 arbitrarily terminated her without^hearing her, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Questioning the same, the present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner, vii) In this Writ Petition, this Court by an interim order dated 06.03.2019 in lA No.l of 2019 suspended the proceedings dated 19.01.2019 issued by the Respondent No.3 and directed^{himtocontinue} the Petitioner as Anganwadi Worker, pending disposal^{oftheWritPetition.} 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Chowdepalli on behalf^{oftherespondent} No.4.

¶59

i) The record shows that basing on the complaint given^bythe villagers dated 28.11.2018 and 04.12.2018, respondent No.3/Project Director has conducted an enquiry, wherein it is proved^{thatthePetitioner} has committed certain irregularities in supply of SNP^{toAWCandshehas} not discharged her duties as per the chart. A show^{causenoticedated} 11.12.2018 was issued to the Petitioner to submit her explanation within seven days. Despite service of the show cause notice,^{shedidnotsubmit} her explanation,

¶60

ii) After approval of the District Selection Committee^and after following due process of law, the termination order^ispassed.

¶61

4

¶62

If

¶63

Ml) As alleged by the Petitioner, it is not a forcible resignation which was created by the respondent authorities, The Petitioner voluntarily submitted her resignation to the authorities, There are no merits in the writ petition and is liable to be dismissed.

¶64

Heard Sri CMR Velu, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Vaka Ramakrishna, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Perused the material on record.

¶65

Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Respondent No.3 issued a show notice to the Petitioner. Further, the Petitioner sought for certain information under Right to Information Act to submit her explanation to the show cause notice, which was not furnished to her by the respondent authorities. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged resignation letter of the Petitioner ISi a fake and created document, which the petitioner has no knowledge about the same. Without considering the genuineness of the resignation letter, respondent authorities arbitrary terminated the petitioner into service. Learned counsel would submit that the Petitioner never submitted such resignation and the signature of the villagers are present on the resignation letter, which itself would speak about the genuineness of the said letter. As can be seen from the resignation letter, the signature of the Petitioner is in Telugu, wherein, the Petitioner never signs in Telugu and she always signs in English. Learned counsel would further submit that without furnishing

¶66

5

¶67

I

¶68

information under Right to Information Act, terminating the Petitioner from service vide impugned letter dated 19.01.2019^{issued byrespondent} No.3, is a clear case of violation of principles of^{naturaljustice.}

¶69

On the other hand, learned Assistant Government^Pleaderfor Women and Child Welfare, on instructions, would submit that in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court^on06.03.2019 in lA No.l of 2019, vide order dated 30.11.2019, Petitioner^{wasreinstatedinto} service and she has been working as such since then. Learned counsel would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders.

¶70

Considering the submissions made and a perusal of^thematerial on record, there is no dispute about the fact that^{inspiteofreceivingthe} letter from the Petitioner under Right to Information^{Acttofurnishcertain} information to enable her to submit her explanation^{totheshowcause} notice, she was terminated from service without furnishing such information. Further, the record would show that the^{allegationsmade} against her are to the effect that the respondent authorities^found1253 kgs. of rice; 522 kgs. of toor dal; 151 liters of Oil^{Packets;57packets} (500 grams each ) of channa in the house of the Petitioner.

¶71

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the termination^order was issued by respondent No.3 in clear violation of principles^ofnatural justice.

¶72

6

¶73

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Interim Order passed by this Court on 06.03.2019 i " in lA No.l of 2019 is made absolute and the respondent authorities are directed to continue the Petitioner in the service. However, this order does not preclude the respondent authorities to take appropriate action against the Petitioner according to the governing rules and law in the light of serious allegations made against her. No order as to costs.

¶74

Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed

¶75

//TRUE COPY// Sd/- K J RAJA GISTRAR assistant OFFICER SECTI

¶76

To,

¶77