Disposed

Smt. T. Posamma, v. The Project Director

Telangana HC14 Jun 2013WP/16898/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a contract supervisor challenging an arbitrary removal notice. The court directed the respondent to verify the petitioner's deputation records and ordered the suspension of the impugned removal notice while the petition is pending.

What did the court decide?

Directions to verify records regarding deputation; Suspension of the removal notice pending disposal.

Smt. T. Posamma, Vs The Project Director — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN

¶3

PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

¶4

WRIT PETITION No. 16898 OF 2013

¶5

Between: T.Posamma … Petitioner V/s. The Project Director, District Women & Child Development Agency, Kakinada, East Godavari District & Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri ASC Bose Counsel for the Respondents : GP for Women & Child Welfare The Court made the following : [order follows].

¶6

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION No. 16898 OF 2013.

¶8

O R D E R :

¶9

This writ petition is filed to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, declaring the notice of the first respondent dated 18-5-2013 in RC.No. 194/A1/2013 in removing the petitioner

¶10

from contract service as Supervisor, ICDS Rampachodavaram, East Godavari district, as illegal arbitrary, without issuing any prior notice, violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to suspend the notice issued by the first respondent dated 18-5-2013 in RC.No.194/A1/2013, pending disposal of the writ petition and to grant such other suitable relief as this Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶11

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶12

Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare.

¶13

3. As seen from the representation of the petitioner dated 01-06-2013, the petitioner was asked to work at Rajavommangi from 0112-2012 to 31-03-2013 and later she joined at Rampachodavaram SectorII on 01-7-2013. It appears that the Minister for Revenue visited Anganwadi Centre B.Ramannapalem [Code No.4], Rampachodavaram, ICDS Project on 05-4-2013. When the villagers informed that the petitioner

¶14

was not providing food to the beneficiaries for two months she was removed from service vide notice in RC.No.194/A1/2013, dated 18-52013. The relieving order of Child Development Project Officer, ICD Project, Rajavommangi vide proceedings 71/A/2012 shows that the petitioner was relieved from work on deputation work on 31-3-2013. Thus, it appears that the petitioner was on deputation to Rajavommangi till 31-3-2013. According to the petitioner she was on deputation from 01-122013 to 31-3-2013. It is not clear, whether any other person was placed as in-charge at B.Ramannapalem when the petitioner was deputed to Rajavommangi from 01-12-2012 to 31-3-2013, when she was at Rajavommangi obviously she could not provide food at B.Ramannapalem.

¶15

4. In the above circumstances, the first respondent-Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency, Kakinada, East Godavari district is directed to verify the records as to from which date to which date the petitioner was deputed to Rajavommangi and pass appropriate orders within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the meanwhile, the impugned notice in RC.No.194/A1/2013, dated 18-5-2013 stands suspended.

¶16

5. Subject to the directions made supra, the writ petition is

¶17

disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs.

¶18

JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR.

¶19

14/06/2013 I s L

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

¶21

WRIT PETITION No. 16898 OF 2013

¶22

Circulation No. Date:14/06/2013 Court Master: I s L Computer No.43

Smt. T. Posamma, v. The Project Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. T. Posamma, v. The Project Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Budida Suresh Kumar Vs The State of Ap.

Vishnubhatla Venkata Sri Siva Subrahmanyam Vs Government of A.P.

Golkonda Shankar Vs The General Manager

S.Sai Prakash, Vs Md.Likoddin

K.Bhagya Lakshmi Vs The Project Director

Md.Sirajuddin Vs The Project Directror