THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos. 1867, 2451 & 3056 OF 2008 COMMON ORDER: The petitioners in W.P.Nos.1867 and 2541 were appointed as Field Assistants, under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, for different villages in Aija Mandal of Mahaboobnagar District. The petitioner W.P.No.3056 of 2008 was appointed as Computer Operator for Aija Mandal, under the said Programme. All the petitioners were removed from service, on the basis of certain allegations. Though no orders of termination were served upon them, the petitioners came to know about the termination, through press note in the Newspapers. They challenge the action of the respondents, in terminating their services, without issuing any notice and without conducting any departmental enquiry. The petitioners allege that the action of the respondents is violative of principles of natural justice and arbitrary. Separate counter affidavits are filed in the writ petitions. It is stated that complaints of serious financial irregularities were received against the petitioners, and after conducting enquiry in the respective villages, the petitioners were removed from service. It is also stated that the petitioners do not have any fundamental right, since the appointments are purely on contractual basis. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare. The fact that the petitioners were appointed as Field Workers and Computer Operators, as the case may be, is not in dispute. The petitioners came to know that their services were terminated, only through news items, published on 7.11.2007. The respondents did not even file the orders of termination, along with their counter affidavits. The basis for the action of the respondents, as indicated in the counter affidavits, is that allegations of financial irregularities were received against the petitioners. An enquiry is said to have been conducted. However, neither any notice was issued to the petitioners, nor any enquiry was conducted against them. From the averments of the counter affidavits, it is evident that the termination of the contract was not either on expiry of the term, or a termination simplicitor. When serious allegations of financial emoluments are made, against the petitioners, it is obligatory on the part of the respondents, to issue notices, pointing out the allegations, before any action is taken thereon. Failure to issue notice, before terminating the services of the petitioners, would amount to violation of principles of natural justice. On this short ground, the action of the respondents, in terminating the services of the petitioners, is liable to set aside. Hence, the writ petitions are allowed, setting aside the order of termination of the services of the petitioners. It is, however, left open to the respondents, to take action, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 7th July 2008 PAN