HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD W.P. No.24523 of 2001 Dated 26-11-2010 Between: Ravindranath. …Petitioner. And: Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Kakinada and another. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD W.P. No.24523 of 2001 ORDER: None appeared for the petitioner. 2. This writ petition is filed to declare the order of the 1st respondent passed in Rc.No.A1/24655/2001 dated 15-11-2001 and consequential order of the 2nd respondent passed in Memo No.12/2001 dated 21-11-2001 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Junior Assistant by the Executive Officer of Sri Venkateswara Swami Mutt, Rajahmundry. The Assistant Commissioner, Endowment Department in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section 4 of Section 57 of the Act 30/87 has sanctioned supplementary budget for the 2nd respondent Institution for the year, 2001-2002. In pursuance of the appointment order, the petitioner has joined in service. During the continuation of service, 1st respondent issued proceedings dated 15-11-2001 stating that it is brought to his notice that the then Executive Officer late K.Bhoja Raju has made certain appointments basing on the budge sanctioned without obtaining any sanction from the competent authority when there is a specific ban of appointments and directed the Executive Officer to cancel the appointments. In pursuance of the said instructions issued by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent passed impugned order dated 21-11-2001 and the same is being questioned in the present writ petition on the ground that he was not given any opportunity before terminating his services. 4. 2nd respondent has filed counter pleading that the appointment of the petitioner itself is irregular and appointing a person by backdoor method without following any rules and regulations will not constitute any right on them to continue in service and further pleaded that mere sanction of budget does not authorize the Executive Officer to make appointment specifically when there is a ban without obtaining any sanction from the competent authority. 5. On 26-2-2002, this Court in W.P.M.P.Nos.120 of 2002 and 30973 of 2002 granted interim stay observing that it is open for the 2nd respondent to terminate the services of the petitioner after issuing due notice specifying that appointment made itself is irregular. 6. None appeared for the respondents also to find out whether they have taken any action in pursuance of the said interim order passed by this court. 7 Therefore, taking into consideration that the petitioner is continuing in service and in view of the interim stay and as no opportunity was given to the petitioner before his termination, the respondents are directed to issue notice and take necessary action with regard to the illegal appointment of the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ____________________________ JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD Dated 26-11-2010. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD W.P. No.24523 of 2001 Dated 26-11-2010