THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION N0.21827 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as a Field Assistant for Gavinivaripalem Gram Panchayat, Prakasam District on 10.05.2007. A charge sheet was issued to him on 26.02.2011 alleging certain irregularities. After conducting enquiry, the 2nd respondent passed an order, dated 31.03.2011 terminating the services of the petitioner. As provided for under the relevant circulars, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent. However, the 2nd respondent passed an order, dated 29.06.2011 rejecting the appeal. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. It is rather unfortunate that for the schemes, under which thousands of crores of rupees are spent, there do not exist any perfect set of Rules or Regulations governing the service conditions of the persons operating the schemes. The result is that the cases of misappropriation or other irregularities are just going scot-free and it has become an avenue for misappropriation of funds. The lack of understanding even of basic tenets of administration is demonstrated by this case itself. The services of the petitioner were terminated by the 2nd respondent, through proceedings, dated 31.03.2011. An appeal is provided to the 1st respondent. It is basic and fundamental that it is only the appellate authority that must deal with the appeal and the authority, against whose order the appeal is filed, must keep himself away from such proceedings. Contrary to such fundamentals, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings, dated 29.06.2011, rejecting the appeal. There cannot be a better instance of total ignorance or incompetence than this. This Court takes serious exception to the way, in which the 2nd respondent functioned, and he is warned hear after not to undertake such misadventures. Further, it is just un- understandable as to how an appeal preferred to the 1st respondent is landed in the hands of the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 29.06.2011, is set aside. The 1st respondent is directed to pass orders in the appeal preferred by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving opportunity to her. He shall also ensure that all the appeals preferred to him are not at all permitted to be dealt with by the 2nd respondent in any manner. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 03.08.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION N0. 21827 of 2011 Date: 03.08.2011 JSU