This writ petition challenging termination of service under N.R.E.G.S. was dismissed as the petitioners had an effective alternative remedy available by way of appeal to the District Collector.
Writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs; petitioners kept open to avail the remedy of appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22755 of 2011
ORDER:
The petitioners were employed as Field Assistants for various villages under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (N.R.E.G.S.) in Medak District. They were issued show cause notices on 27.1.2011 alleging certain irregularities. Explanations were submitted on 21.3.2011. Taking the same into account, the 1st respondent passed individual orders dated 28.5.2011 terminating the petitioners from service. Hence, this writ petition.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2.
The orders of termination were passed after show cause notices were issued to the petitioners and after explanations were submitted by them. Though the petitioners had urged several grounds in challenge to the impugned orders, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. An effective alternative remedy by way of appeal to the District Collector is available to the petitioners. The appellate authority would be in a position to call for the records and arrive at just and proper conclusions.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to avail the remedy of appeal. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY,J
DATE: 12th August, 2011 pnb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging termination orders with an available alternative remedy should be entertained.
Field Assistants
Respondent 1
Respondent 2
L. NARASIMHA REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
