THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 11646 of 2011 DATE: 16-06-2011 Between: A.Mahendar .. Petitioner And The Project Director, DWMA, Mahaboobnagar District and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 11646 of 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in removing the petitioner from service vide proceedings No.E.G.S/D5/01/2007 dated 26.09.2009 even without issuing any notice and opportunity to submit explanation, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate him into duties forthwith by setting aside the above proceedings. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant on contract basis in National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (for short “NREGS”) at Pinnamcharla Village, Atmakuru Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District and has been discharging his duties without any remarks. The 2nd respondent issued removal orders vide impugned proceedings No.E.G.S/D5/01/2007 dated 26.09.2009, even without giving any prior notice, alleging that social audit was conducted in the Mandal from 23.04.2007 to 01.05.2007 on the implementation of NREGS and it was found that he misappropriated a sum of Rs.9,283/-. In the said social audit report, it is stated that he had withdrawn money for 73 days by entering the names of his family members in the muster roll, though they have not done the work. Though it is stated that the group leaders collected Rs.8,235/- @ Rs.5/- from each wage seeker for 1647 days, the 2nd respondent issued notice to him on 06.04.2009 to recover the same. But they deducted actual alleged amount of Rs.912/- on 06.12.2007 from his salary. On 14.05.2010 he made a representation to the 2nd respondent requesting to take steps for reinstatement, but they did not respond. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondents without issuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry, removed the petitioner from service and thereby violated the principles of natural justice. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents contended that the order was passed in the year 2009 and the contract period of the employee was completed and even if the impugned order set aside the petitioner will not be reinstated in view of the fact that some other person was appointed in his place and therefore, it is a futile exercise. 5. Without adverting to the merits of the case, whether the impugned proceedings dated 26.09.2009 are correct or not, the same cannot be set aside for the simple reason that the petitioner has not approached the Court immediately after his termination. No doubt, the respondents cannot terminate the petitioner without issuing any notice, but the fact remains that question of reinstatement does not arise at this point of time as some other person was appointed in his place. The person who was appointed in the place of petitioner was not impleaded, who is necessary party. Therefore, no cause survives in the writ petition. The writ petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of latches and delay. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ K.C.BHANU, J 16-06-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 11646 of 2011 DATE: 16-06-2011 MR