THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.18967 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as a Field Assistant in the National Rural Employment Guaranteed Scheme for Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Ananthapur District, in the year 2007. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, the 2nd respondent herein, issued a show cause notice, dated 21.08.2008, to the petitioner, to explain as to why disciplinary action shall not be taken. It was mentioned that, the petitioner is functioning as Reporter for Andhra Jyothi Daily, even while working as the Field Assistant. Allegations of misappropriation and diversion of funds were also made. It was indicated that an enquiry would be held in the Gram Panchayat, on 26.08.2008. The petitioner states that, he submitted his explanation, on 25.08.2008, and no meeting, as such, has taken place on 26.08.2008. The 2nd respondent passed order, dated 27.08.2008, removing the petitioner from service, while making reference to the proceedings of a meeting said to have taken place in the village. The same is challenged in this Writ Petition. It is urged that the impugned order is violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure prescribed by law. On behalf of respondents, a detailed counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the petitioner did not submit explanation, but was present in the enquiry that was held, on 26.08.2008. It is also stated that the District Collector, the 1st respondent, informed to the 2nd respondent that the petitioner holds accreditation card, as a Reporter. The petitioner filed a reply-affidavit, stating that he submitted explanation on 25.08.2008 and that the same was not taken into account. He reiterated his contention that no meeting took place on 26.08.2008. Heard Sri Ch.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. Ch.Vedavani, learned counsel for the respondents. There is no dispute that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice, on 21.08.2008, by the 2nd respondent. The allegations made against the petitioner are that, a) he continued to be a Reporter of a Telugu Daily and held accreditation card; and b) he misappropriated funds under the Scheme. There is some dispute as to whether the petitioner submitted explanation or not. While he asserts that he submitted it on 25.08.2008, the respondents denied the same. So is the case with the conducting of enquiry. The impugned order, in clear terms not only refers to the conducting of enquiry in the village on 26.08.2008 in the presence of all the villagers, but also a specific allegation as to the digging of a Farm Pond in the field of one Sri Iragam Reddy. It was alleged that a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- was misappropriated on that account, without doing any work. The owner of the land is said to have deposed in the meeting that no work was undertaken in his land. Whether or not the petitioner was present in the meeting, it hardly makes any difference, once he was issued a show cause notice and enquiry was conducted. This Court cannot sit as an appellate authority over the findings recorded in the disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner stated that he ceased to be a reporter, with effect from the date of his appointment and he never took accreditation card. However, he did not state as to whether he has submitted his resignation, or was removed as Reporter by the employer with effect from the date of his appointment. So far as the issuance of accreditation card is concerned, the petitioner flatly denied. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, has produced a copy of the accreditation card, which contains the photograph of the petitioner and is valid up to 31.12.2008. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that any irregularity has crept into the impugned order. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.15.07.2010. GJ