IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 725 of 2009 Between: Smt. B. Aruna W/o. Yadaiah R/o. Marriguda Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director District Water Management Corporation Cum National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme Nalgonda District Office at Nalgonda. 2 The Mandal Parishad Development Officer Marriguda Mandal, Naglonda District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the proceedings NO. E1/1016/EGS/2008 dt. 28-11-2008 issued by the 1st respondent consequential notice dt. 19-1-2009 issued by the 2nd respondent in proposing to remove me from service as Field Assistant under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme at Marriguda Mandal, Nalgonda District as illegal, unlawful contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice and same may be set aside, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.G.ELISHA The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 725 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed by Smt. B. Aruna assailing the action of the respondents in issuing Proceedings No.E1/1016/EGS/2008, dated 28-11-2008 and consequential notice dated 19-1-2009. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme at Marriguda Mandal, Nalgonda District in the year 2005. Certain irregularities were noticed in discharging her duties. Thereupon, the Director, District Water Management Corporation cum National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme directed Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Marriguda-2nd respondent to take disciplinary action against the petitioner and remove her from the said post by following due process of law. Thereupon, the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Marriguda Mandal, Nalgonda District issued notice to the petitioner calling upon her to explain the variation of Rs. 2,76,000/- in the works submitted by her. The petitioner submitted explanation to the show cause notice. Apprehending that the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Marriguda Mandal, Nalgonda District-2nd Respondent would proceed to remove her without application of mind and without considering the explanation submitted by her, she approached this Court by invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, G. Elisha, takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.2. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not responsible for verification of the works and therefore, no liability can be fastened on her with regard to the variations as to the worth of works to a tune of Rs.2,76,000/-. 6. A fact remains that the petitioner submitted explanation to the show cause notice and now the matter rested with the 2nd Respondent-Mandal Parishad Development Officer to consider the explanation and pass appropriate orders. 7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the 1st respondent with regard to punishment in the proceeding dated 28-11-2008. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 23rd January, 2009. Note: C.C.in three days B/o: KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 725 OF 2009 23rd January, 2009.