THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.31635 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to discharge his duties as Computer Operator in the office of the 3rd respondent, without any enquiry and without any valid reason as illegal and arbitrary apart from violative of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to discharge his duties as Computer Operator in the office of the 3rd respondent. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he joined duty in the office of the 4th respondent as Computer Operator in the year 2007 and thereafter as he was transferred to the office of the 3rd respondent on 15.11.2008 he is discharging his duties in the office of the 3rd respondent. It is submitted that during the 2nd round of Social Audit, conducted by the Social Audit Committee, in the month of October, 2009, found some irregularities against him i.e. during the period while he was working as Computer operator in the office of the 4th respondent, alleging that he wrongly generated pay orders for seven days as against four days, due to that Rs.4,230/- was misused, for which, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner along with 27 others at Molakalacheruvu police Station, Chittoor District and thereafter, the petitioner was released on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2010 passed in Crl.M.P. No.5583 of 2010. It is submitted that the execution of works of Farm Ponds and digging of Pits for plantation were done under Field Assistants and Technical Assistants in the respective villages. The 3rd respondent is the Mandal Supervision Officer for NREGS Funds in the respective Mandal. Based on a report given by the Technical Assistants and Field Assistants, by seeing the muster rolls, as how many workers participated in execution of particular work, the job of the petitioner is to generate pay orders as per the reports given by the Field Assistants and Technical Assistants who were worked in the fields. The role of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent’s office as a Computer Operator is that to prepare pay orders and miscellaneous work of the 3rd respondent. After registering a criminal case, without any enquiry, the respondents are not allowing the petitioner to discharge his duties as Computer Operator as no fault of him. Therefore, the action of the respondents is illegal, arbitrary apart from violative of principles of natural justice. No counter affidavit has been filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the duty of the petitioner as Computer Operator in the office of the respondents is that based on a report given by the Technical Assistants and Field Assistants, by seeing muster rolls, as how many workers have participated in execution of the particular work, he as to generate pay orders. Accordingly, he discharged his duty. It is also submitted that without conducting any enquiry and without issuing any notice, dispensing the services of the petitioner from attending the duty is illegal and arbitrary. The allegation against the petitioner is that he wrongly generated pay orders for seven days as against the four days due to that Rs.4,230/- was misused for which, a criminal case was registered against him along with 27 others and the petitioner is on bail. The main grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that the respondents are not allowing him to discharge his duties without any valid reason. This Court by order dated 15.12.2010 while issuing notice before admission passed interim direction to the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to join duties on the basis of the proceedings dated 22.10.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent, forthwith. Pursuant to the order dated 15.12.2010 the petitioner is permitted to discharge his duties as Computer Operator in the office of the 3rd respondent. If that being so, this writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the interim order dated 15.12.2010 passed by this Court to be a final order. Accordingly, in terms of the interim order dated 15.12.2010, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to joint duty on the basis of the proceedings dated 22.10.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent. However, it is made clear that this order does not preclude the respondents from taking any action, in accordance with law. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 01.04.2011 LSK