IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY THIS THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17971 of 2014 Between:
Kodamanchili Ramakrishna . PETITIONER And The Vice Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.Scheduled Castes Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, Hyderabad and 2 others . RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17971 of 2014
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in orally asking the petitioner not to come to office as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to remove the petitioner from service without following due process of law.
The petitioner was appointed as driver in the office of the 3rd respondent on 16.05.1990 and according to the petitioner, he has been working in the office of the 1st respondent for the last 24 years. It is submitted by the petitioner that during the first week of April, 2014 the 3rd respondent orally asked him not to come to office and not to sign in the N.M.R Attendance Register and thereafter, he was not permitted to attend the office and work as driver.
Earlier, the petitioner filed W.P.No.865/1998 before this Court questioning the action of the respondents in not regularizing his services in the post of driver and the same was dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner for applying for the post of driver as and when the respondents notify the same. However, the petitioner has been continuing as driver in the office of the 1st respondent. The present writ petition is filed with a limited prayer to continue him as driver in the office of the 1st respondent.
The respondents filed counter admitting that the petitioner has been working in the society as a driver w.e.f. 16.05.1990 on daily wage and on temporary basis. The respondents contended that the petitioner is not entitled for regularization of his services as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 and the said aspect was also decided by this Court in the writ petition filed by the petitioner in W.P.No.865/1998. The respondents further contended that they did not ask the petitioner not to come to the office at any point of time and the petitioner himself absented from the duties. It is further submitted that there is only one vehicle in road worthy condition in the office with regular driver.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the admissions made by the respondents in their counter, and as the present writ petition is filed with a limited prayer to continue the petitioner in service, I am inclined to allow this writ petition.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to continue the petitioner as driver in the office of the 1st respondent and not to remove him without following due process of law. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.
R.KANTHA RAO,J Date: 23.07.2014 Dsr