THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NOs.16590, 16861, 17014, 21816 and 30194 of 1997 DATED: 10-04-2007 W.P.No.16590 of 1997: Between: K.V.R. Anjaneyulu .. Petitioner and The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Endowments Department Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents W.P.No.16861 of 1997: Between: S. Srinivasu .. Petitioner and The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Endowments Department Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents W.P.No.17014 of 1997: Between: J. Saibaba .. Petitioner and The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Endowments Department Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents W.P.No.21816 of 1997: Between: B. Surender .. Petitioner and The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents W.P.No.30194 of 1997: Between: K. Ravinder .. Petitioner and The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NOs.16590, 16861, 17014, 21816 and 30194 of 1997 COMMON ORDER: Since common questions of law and facts arise for consideration in all these writ petitions, they are all being disposed of by this common order. The writ petitions are filed against the show cause notices issued by the Executive Officers of respective respondent- Devasthanams asking the petitioners to explain as to why their services should not be terminated. The impugned show cause notices indicate that in view of the instructions issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments Department, Hyderabad and in obedience to the circular issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments of the respective districts, the services of the petitioners were sought to be terminated and hence the petitioners were asked to explain as to why their services should not be terminated. The impugned orders are bereft of any details as to what exactly the instructions issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad are, or what exactly is the circular issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments Department. Since the said impugned show cause notices do not reveal the reasons as to why the services of the petitioners were sought to be terminated and what is the explanation sought for from them and why it was sought for, it could not have been possible for the petitioners to submit any detailed explanation. Under those circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned show cause notice are bereft of any reasons and violative of principles of natural justice, and are liable to be set aside. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed setting aside the impugned show cause notices. No costs. ____​__________ C.V. RAMULU, J 10th April, 2007. IBL