THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 23082 OF 1999 Dated: 04.02.2011 Between: K.Murali Mohan Babu ..... Petitioner AND The State Government of A.P., and others .....Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 23082 OF 1999 ORDER : The petitioner herein was appointed as an Attender by the District Collector and President of the District Scheduled Castes Service Co-operative Society Limited, Nellore vide proceedings dated 17.07.1996. However, by order dated 14.10.1999, the petitioner’s services were terminated on the ground that the petitioner’s appointment was made without obtaining the permission from the Government. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record, including the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. The fact that the petitioner’s brother by name K.Rajendra Prasad was working as Work Inspector in the District Scheduled Castes Service Co-operative Society Limited and that he died while in service is not in dispute. It is also clear from the material available on record that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds in terms of G.O.Ms.No.612, dated 30.12.1991. It is alleged in the impugned order of termination that the petitioner’s appointment was illegal and irregular for want of permission of the Government as required under law. It is also contended in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents that G.O.Ms.No.612, dated 30.12.1991 was not applicable to the services of the Corporation. Be that as it may, it is not disputed before this Court that before passing the impugned order dated 14.10.1999, the petitioner was not given any opportunity to make his representation. It is apparent that the impugned order was issued straightaway on the basis of the letter of the Managing Director of the Corporation dated 15.03.1999 and Note Orders said to have been issued by the District Collector dated 14.10.1999. Having regard to the admitted fact that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to make his representation before terminating his services, the impugned order on the face of it is in violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, it is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 14.10.1999 is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pass appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to make his representation against the proposed action. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date : 04.02.2011 Ivd