Allowed

Sudagani (Dikonda) Yakalakshmi v. The Child Development Project Officer

Telangana HC24 Jun 2016WP/25113/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court set aside termination proceedings against an Anganwadi Helper for alleged fake transfer certificate due to violation of natural justice. Proceedings remanded with directions to furnish report and grant opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings set aside; matter remanded to third respondent to furnish Head Master's report within four weeks and dispose of case within twenty weeks; status quo maintained for ten weeks.

Sudagani (Dikonda) Yakalakshmi Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.25113 of 2009

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner challenges the proceedings No.A/178/2008 dated 06.11.2009.

¶5

2. The third respondent through the impugned proceedings terminated the services of the petitioner as Anganwadi Helper.

¶6

The reason for termination, it is alleged, is that the petitioner has produced fake transfer certificate.

¶7

3. The case of petitioner is that the third respondent did not give copy of the report of the Head Master, conducted enquiry much less afforded minimum opportunity to traverse the charge of fake transfer certificate alleged against her.

¶8

4. This Court, on 19.11.2009, granted interim suspension of the proceedings dated 06.11.2009. Respondents filed petition to vacate the interim order dated 19.11.2009.

¶9

5. Counter affidavit, no doubt, refers to the totality of circumstances, which compelled the third respondent to issue the proceedings impugned in the writ petition.

¶10

6. The primary objection of petitioner against the impugned proceedings is violation of principles of natural justice.

¶11

7. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent, having regard to the totality of circumstances, does not seriously dispute that reasonable opportunity was not afforded to the petitioner.

¶12

8. This Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order.

¶13

9. The proceedings dated 06.11.2009 are set aside,

¶14

matter remanded to the third respondent for consideration and disposal afresh. To avoid further delay and lapses in procedure, this Court directs the third respondent to furnish a copy of the report of the Head Master to petitioner within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. From the date of receipt of a copy of Head Master’s report, petitioner is given two (2) weeks to submit her explanation. The third respondent by considering the explanation and the material available on record, within a further period of four (4) weeks disposes of the case pending in File No.A/178/2008. The parties are directed to maintain status quo, as on date, for a period of ten (10) week from today.

¶15

The writ petition is allowed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶16

___________ S.V. BHATT, J

¶17

June 24, 2016 DSK

Sudagani (Dikonda) Yakalakshmi v. The Child Development Project Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudagani (Dikonda) Yakalakshmi v. The Child Development Project Officer

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

Penki Krishna Mohan Vs The Revenue Divisional officer, Kakinada

Coromandel International Limited, Vs A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission

International Paper Appm Limited Vs A.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission

N.Raghunatha Reddy Vs N.Gururaja Rao

Koley Mangamma, Vs Yelisetty Krishna Murthy

Golla Chinna Eranna Vs Smt. a. Girijamma