The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.15107 of 2007 Dated 28th June, 2010 Between: B.Lakshmi and others …Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh and 19 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Ms.V.Jayasree for Mr.C.Damodar Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 3: AGP for Education Counsel for respondent Nos.2, 4 to 18: None appeared Counsel for respondent Nos.19 & 20: Mr.Ch.Srinivas for Mr.K.Vasudeva Reddy The Court made the following: Order: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.4 to 18, in trying to discontinue the services of the petitioners as cooks/implementing agencies of mid-day meals programme in the schools of their respective villages, without notice and affording an opportunity of being heard, as illegal and arbitrary. The grievance of the petitioners, who were stated to have been engaged as mid-day meal cooks, is that though they have been functioning as cooks without any complaint whatsoever, at the instance of local politics, they are being sought to be discontinued. On behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6, a counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No.2- District Educational Officer, Karimnagar District, wherein it is interalia stated that the services of petitioner No.14 were dispensed with on the complaints received from the school children to the effect that she has failed to cook and serve hot meals. It is further stated that petitioner Nos.8 and 13 are not working as cooks in any schools functioning under the control of respondent No.3 and that the remaining petitioners are discharging their duties as cooks and that they have filed the present Writ Petition on mere apprehension. Respondent No.2 denied the allegation that efforts are being made to change them. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.30794 of 2007 was filed by two individuals seeking their impleadment as respondent Nos.19 and 20 in the Writ Petition and this Court, by order, dated 29-04-2009, ordered the same. The impleaded respondents have filed WVMP.No.1507 of 2009 seeking to vacate the interim order passed by this Court on 16-07- 2007. At the hearing, the learned Counsel representing the impleaded respondents submitted that the grievance of his clients is only against petitioner No.2. From the stand taken by respondent No.2, it is evident that petitioner No.14 was removed from service. If petitioner No.14 feels aggrieved by such removal, she is entitled to question the order of her removal by initiating appropriate proceedings before the competent forum. If petitioner No.14 approaches respondent No.2 for supply of a copy of the order of her removal, the same should be furnished to her to enable her to question the same. With respect to petitioner Nos.8 and 13, respondent No.2 categorically pleaded that they have not been working in any of the schools within the jurisdiction of respondent No.3. No material is filed by the said petitioners in support of their plea that they have been working. Therefore, no relief can be granted in favour of petitioner Nos.8 and 13. As far as other petitioners are concerned, in view of the unequivocal statement made by respondent No.2 that there is no move to remove them, no further orders need be passed in their favour. With regard to the plea of the impleaded respondents in the Writ Petition, no direction can be granted in their favour qua petitioner No.2, as they have not initiated substantive legal proceedings claiming relief against the said petitioner. If they have any legitimate grievance against continuance of the services of petitioner No.2, they are entitled to approach the competent authority with a representation. If such a representation is made, the competent authority shall examine the same and take an appropriate decision thereon. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that disposal of this Writ Petition shall not be understood as a mandate for continuance of the petitioners. The respondents are entitled to initiate appropriate action in accordance with law against any or all of them, if they are found to have committed any illegality while functioning as cooks. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 16-07-2007, is vacated and WPMP.No.19009 of 2007 and WVMP.Nos.1507 and 4058 of 2009 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 28th June, 2010 lur