Nuli Venkata Narayana Rao Vs the State of Ap

¶1

I !}

¶2

APHC010401342025

¶3

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

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20610 OF 2025

¶7

Between;

¶8

Null Venkata Narayana Rao, S/o. Ramachandra Rao, Aged^{about59Years,} R/o. 4-3-5, Singamsetti Street, Narsapur, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary of Higher Education, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Director of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Mangaligiri.

¶13

The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, For Director of Coleegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Mangaligiri.

¶14

The Principal, ASNM Government Degree College, Palakollu,^West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶15

The Principal, SCIM, Government Degree College, Tanuku, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶16

Dr K Madhu Shalini, Lecturer in Commerce, BGBS Womens College, Narsapur, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

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

¶19

1^,

¶20

pleased to issue order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2'^'" Respondent and Respondent in issuing the proceedings vide PROCS.RC.No.117/PAC-l/2025 dated 28-07-2025 through which the authorization to process the salary bills of the staff of BGBS College, Naraspuram was entrusted to the Principal, AISNM Government Degree College, Palkollu, West Godavari District and the passing of the said bills was entrusted to SCIM Government Degree College, West Godavari District, without conducting any enquiry and without passing any orders on the explanation submitted by the Petitioner on 28-04-2025 and representation submitted on 29-07-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14,19(1 )(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and set-aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to restore the Salary processing authority of the B.G.B.S. College, Narsapuram, West Godavari District to the Petitioner.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

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 suspend the operation of Memo vide PROCS.RC.No.117/PAC-I/2025 dated 28-07-2025 issued by 2"^ Respondent.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P S P SURESH KUMAR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 to 6: -—

¶26

The Court made the following order:

¶27

[3327]

¶28

APHC010401342025

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶30

SM0 AT AMARAVATI

¶31

A-i-

¶32

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶33

WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST

¶34

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO: 20610/2025

¶38

Between:

¶39

Null Venkata Narayana Rao ...PETITIONER

¶40

AND

¶41

The State Of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT{S)

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.P S P SURESH KUMAR

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION

¶46

The Court made the following:

¶47

9

¶48

Order:

¶49

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the Memo, vide, PROCS RC.No.117/PAC-I/2025, dated 28.07.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2, through which, authorization to process the salary^{billsofthestaffofBGBS} College, Narasapuram was entrusted to the Principal,^{AISNMGovernment} Degree College, Palkollu, West Godavari District.

¶50

The petitioner is the Secretary and Correspondent of Bhagavatham Gupta Bangaru Sesha Avataram (BGBS) Womens College situated at Narasapuram Town & Mandal at West Godavari District. The duty of the petitioner is to process the salaries of the aided teaching and non-teaching staff and for the purpose of processing the salaries of aided staff; the petitioner has to prepare the bills which should be approved by him by affixing his signature with stamp.

¶51

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner^{submitsthat6^^} respondent was affixing her signatures in two different^mannersand the same has been demonstrated before this Court. Apparently, signatures on the documents can be easily identified with the naked eye that both the signatures are in total variance. It is further submitted that respondent has not remitted the amounts collected towards Degree^{Courseandalsothe} petitioner received various complaints and in connection with that, a dispute arose between them. 6^*^ respondent has sent a letter to 2’"^ respondent on 16.03.2025 alleging that she was not paid with salaries. On that, a notice was sent to the petitioner on 21.04.2025 to submit explanation and the

¶52

petitioner submitted an explanation on 27.04.2025. On 29.07.2025 a representation has also been made to 2'^‘^ respondent by the petitioner, however, the respondents are not conducting any enquiry nor disposing the same.

¶53

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the respondents are directed to conduct enquiry and dispose of the representation, dated 29.07.2025 made by the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶54