THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.27801 of 2005 Date:30.12.2005 Between: Kum.Gajjela Shoba and another -------PETITIONERS AND The Principal, A.P.R. School (Girls) and another ---------RESPONDENTS ORDER: The first respondent issued a notification, dated 18.06.2004 inviting applications for selecting the candidates for appointing them as Multipurpose Workers (M.P.Ws.), on contract basis. The petitioners responded to the same. Through the separate proceedings, dated 12.02.2005, the first respondent selected and appointed the petitioners as M.P.Ws., on contract basis. It is stated that the roster has been followed in the matter of appointing the petitioners. Initially, the contract was for a period of one year and thereafter, it was extended for the subsequent academic year. The second respondent issued proceedings, dated 21.07.2005, stating that during the course of enquiry conducted by the Academic Guiding Officer, it was found that the appointment of the petitioners was made in violation of roster system. He, accordingly, directed the first respondent to discharge the petitioners. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the respondents. In the order of appointment, dated 12.02.2005, the first respondent has clearly stated that the vacancies were identified with reference to the roster, and the social status of the petitioners, namely scheduled castes and BC-‘A’, were clearly mentioned therein. It is not known as to on what basis the second respondent came to the conclusion that the roster was not followed. Even assuming that such a contingency existed, he ought to have put the petitioners on notice before discharging them. On this short ground, the impugned order is set aside. It is left open to the respondents to pass appropriate orders, after issuing notice to the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 30.12.2005 kdl