IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 723 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/04/2008 in WP NO : 14093 OF 1999 on the file of the High Court.) Between: S.Usha Sree D/o. Vishwamber Rao Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, Hyderabad. R/o. H.No.15-17/12, raja Nagar Colony, New Mirjalguda, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Secretary, Higher Education Department. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The Director of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad. 4 The Secretary Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, hyderabad. 5 The Principal Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.SADU RAJESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION WRIT APPEAL NO : 724 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/04/2008 in WP NO : 14093 OF 1999 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Sharada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj Hyderabad rep.by its Secretary 2 The Principal Sharada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shasheergunj, Hyderabad 3 The Director of Intermediate Education, A.P., Hyderabad. 4 The Secretary Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, hyderabad. 5 The Principal Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND 1 S.Usha Sree D/o. Vishwamber Rao Sarada Vidyalaya Junior College for Girls Shamsheergunj, Hyderabad. 2 The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Secretary, Higher Education Department. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 The Director of Intermediate Education A.P Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.B.NARAYANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following : COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by the order passed in W.P.No. 14093 of 1999, dated 17-4-2008, these two appeals have been filed. One appeal has been filed by the Management and another by the Lecturer-employee. So far as W.A.No. 723 of 2008 is concerned, it has been filed by the Lecturer in Political Science. The appellant in W.A.No. 723 of 2008 was working as a Lecturer in Political Science under respondent No. 4 and 5. Her service had been terminated and, therefore, she filed W.P.No. 14093 of 1999. After hearing the learned Advocates, the learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that her service had been terminated without following due procedure. Therefore, the action terminating the service of the petitioner was quashed and set aside with an observation that it would be open to the Management to terminate the service of the petitioner in accordance with law and after following the procedure prescribed under Sections 79 or 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act. Being aggrieved by the aforestated order passed by the learned Single Judge, the employee-Lecturer as well as the Management have come in appeal. In our opinion, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is just and proper. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate appearing for the Lecturer-employee that the service of the petitioner was terminated with a malafide intention. In any case, the action of termination has been quashed and set aside by the learned Single Judge leaving it open to the Management to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Therefore, in our opinion, right now there is no cause of action for the petitioner to challenge the validity of the impugned judgment. On the other hand, it has been submitted on behalf of the Management (who are the appellants in W.A.No. 724 of 2008) that the petitioner was not appointed in the Junior College, but she was appointed in the Degree College or in other words she was appointed by another college. Be that as it may, the one who had appointed can always terminate the service of the petitioner by following legal procedure, as observed by the learned Single Judge. For the aforestated reasons, we do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, and, therefore, both the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. _________________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 17th July, 2008. ________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J GRR