THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 33590 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the order passed by the 1st respondent in Proceedings No.SCN/GTR/00003/2010 dated 29.03.2011 placing the petitioner under “Temporary out of Contract Employment” basing on the unilateral social audit report submitted without following due procedure of providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner as prescribed under circular instructions in A/797/CVO/SA/2011 dated 20.04.2011 and the further action in not paying the subsistence allowance from May 2011 onwards, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, and violative of principles of natural justice, and set aside the same and direct the respondents herein to continue the petitioner as Additional Programme officer in Bollapalli Mandal, Guntur District, with all consequential and incidental benefits attached thereto and to pay the remuneration from 29.03.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. The case of the petitioner in brief is: The petitioner was selected as Additional Programme Officer on Fixed Tenure Employee (FTE) basis under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) vide proceedings dated 12.05.2007 issued by the 1st respondent-Project Director, District Water Management Agency, Guntur, and is posted to Ballapalli Mandal vide the 1st respondent proceedings dated 07.09.2009. While so, the 1st respondent issued a notice dated 11.01.2011 stating that the social audit team reported certain irregularities/lapses in executing work in Bollapalli Mandal and called upon the petitioner to submit explanation. The petitioner submitted explanation dated 15.02.2011 through the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, passed the impugned proceedings dated 29.03.2011, placing the petitioner under “Temporary out of Contract Employment” under Rule 2.2. of “Disciplinary Policy of FTEs of SRDS”. Further the petitioner has been issued a charge memo dated 15.04.2011 for which the petitioner submitted explanation. However, no enquiry was held. The 1st respondent addressed a letter dated 02.05.2011 to the 3rd respondent stating that the petitioner is eligible for subsistence allowance, pending disciplinary proceedings, and the subsistence allowance was paid for April, 2011 and thereafter, the said allowance was not paid. The petitioner submits that this Court, in WP No. 14121 of 2009 has set out a procedure for holding disciplinary enquiry, however, the same is not followed in the present case. Hence, this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the date of appointment, the petitioner has been performing his duties with sincerity. Basing on certain complaints, the 1st respondent issued the impugned proceedings putting the petitioner out of contract employment and further, a charge memo dated 15.04.2011 was issued directing the petitioner to submit explanation and the petitioner submitted his explanation, but so far no final orders have been passed by the 1st respondent. The counsel further submits that though the 1st respondent communicated to the 3rd respondent that the petitioner is eligible for subsistence allowance, the same was paid for April, 2011 and thereafter it was discontinued. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents contend that due to committing of certain irregularities by the petitioner, and based on the social audit report, the impugned proceedings dated 29.03.2011 have been issued and a charge memo dated 15.04.2011 was also issued, for which the petitioner has submitted explanation, and the matter is under enquiry. In view of the submissions of both the counsel and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is to be seen whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for in this writ petition. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Additional Programme Officer in the MGNREGS Scheme and basing on the social audit report wherein certain complaints with regard to irregularities have been alleged, the petitioner was placed under temporary out of contract employment and was also issued a charge memo dated 15.04.2011 and was asked to submit his explanation and the petitioner has submitted his explanation to the said charge memo. However, no final orders have been passed by the 1st respondent in the matter. Under the circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to pass final orders within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by following due procedure as set out in WP No.14121 of 2009 . Further, pending final orders, the 1st respondent is directed to pay subsistence allowance, including arrears, to the petitioner, in accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH 22nd December, 2011 Note: C.C. in one week. B/o KSM