THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27506 of 2010 Date: 05.11.2011 Between : J. Tholisamma .… Petitioner and The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District and others. …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27506 of 2010 ORDER : Heard Sri M. Karibasaiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and Smt. Ch. Vedavani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5. 2. The petitioner was appointed as an implementing agency of Mid-day Meal Programme vide proceedings Rc.No.300/02, dated 21.12.2002 issued by the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Kuderu Mandal, Anantapur District. By means of the impugned order dated 9.6.2010 issued by the 5th respondent-Mandal Educational Officer, Kuderu Mandal, she was removed from the said job. The petitioner has challenged the said order on the substantive ground that she was not afforded an opportunity to submit her explanation before removing her from the said job. 3. The 3rd respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the performance of the petitioner was not satisfactory. It is stated that the petitioner was pressurizing the Head Master to prepare escalated bills. She threatened the Head Master even by barging into the class room and yielding threats to the Head Master. Therefore, on 20.7.2010 the Panchayat level Committee convened a meeting and resolved to remove the petitioner. Accordingly, orders were passed removing the petitioner. It is, therefore, stated that the petitioner is not entitled to continue in the job, as her behaviour does not warrant for her continuation. 4. I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the reasons for removal of the petitioner. Suffice it to state that in matters of this nature, principles of natural justice require that the delinquent ought to have been put on notice, which has not been done in the instant case. The counter affidavit specifically states that notice has not been given to the petitioner as the appointment order itself was issued on the condition of removal if her performance is not satisfactory. 5. In view of the admitted fact that the petitioner was not put on notice and given an opportunity to put-forth her case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of remanding the matter to the 3rd respondent for consideration afresh after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioner. Till a decision is taken in that regard, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 05.11.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.27506 of 2010 05.11.2011 (Msr)