IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 933 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 02/04/2009 in WP NO : 6958 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The Welfare Commissioner, A.P. Labour Welfare Baord, 1-1-18/73 Behind Devi Theatre Near RTC Cross Roads, Hyderabad-500 020 ..... APPELLANT AND 1 M.Vajram, W/o. T.Ramulu, Labour Welfare Centre, Guntur Town, Guntur District. 2 The Depty Commissioner of Welfare, (Labour) Guntur, Guntur district. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.P.V.KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.GOPAL RAO The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari ) Aggrieved by the order dated 02.04.2009 made in WPMP No.9102 of 2009 in W.P. No. 6958 of 2009 by a learned Single Judge suspending the proceedings No.B/2190/2009 dated 3.2.2009 passed by the first respondent in the writ petition, terminating the services of the writ petitioner as Typewriting Instructress with effect from 3.2.2009, the present appeal is filed. The writ petitioner was appointed as Typewriting Instructress after undergoing due process of selection and her services were also regularized and the benefits of Revised Pay Scales, 1993, were also extended to her with effect from 1.4.1996. While so, during 4.12.2008 to 8.12.2008 when the writ petitioner was on leave in connection with the marriage of her daughter, explanation was called for, for her alleged absence on 6.12.2008 during the visit of Asst. Labour Officer, to which the petitioner submitted suitable explanation and further action was dropped. But, however, the impugned proceedings were issued terminating the services of the writ petitioner on the ground of withdrawal of Income Generating Scheme in respect of Guntur District, where the petitioner had worked. Hence, the writ petition. The learned Single Judge having found that the services of the petitioner were regularized and regular pay scale was sanctioned as far back as 17.4.2001 and the petitioner was transferred from Labour Welfare Centre, Guntur to the office of the A.P. Labour Welfare Board, Hyderabad, by an order dated 11.11.2008, the action of the respondents in terminating the services of the petitioner appears to be illegal and arbitrary and consequently suspended the same and directed the respondents to continue the petitioner in service pending further orders. Aggrieved thereby the present Writ Appeal is filed. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Vacate Stay Petition filed by the appellant before the learned Single Judge is still pending adjudication. Recording the same, without adverting to the merits or otherwise of the lis as the appeal is filed against an interim order, we grant liberty to the learned counsel for the appellant to move the said Vacate Stay Petition before the learned Single Judge. With the above direction, the Writ Appeal is disposed of at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. _____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar July 18, 2009 MAS