IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No : 14128 of 2009 Between: Kambham Sankar Rao K. Jagannadham R/o. Penuganchiprole Village & Mandal, Krishna District – 521 190. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer Electrical (Operation) A.P.S.P.D.C.L. PWD., Ground Bandar Road, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2 The Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation Rural) A.P.S.P.D.C.L. PWD., Ground Bandar Road, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3 The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operation) A.P.S.P.D.C.L. Jaggaiahpeta, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in deciding to remove the petitioner from the post of shift operator without following any procedure and without giving him any opportunity to give explanation as illegal, arbitrary, unlawful, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the services of petitioner in view of his experience and qualification of I.T.I. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.S.CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court at the stage of admission made the following O R D E R: The writ petitioner asserts that he has been working as a Shift Operator at 33/11 KV Sub-station at Chillakallu of Krishna District under the jurisdiction of the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited since January 2007. It is also asserted that the respondents have been paying the provident fund contribution payable by them towards the employer’s half also. It is further asserted that on 2nd July 2009, the Superintending Engineer (Operation), Vijayawada has inspected the Sub-station and informed the writ petitioner that he is going to remove the writ petitioner from service. It is further asserted that the Superintending Engineer directed the writ petitioner to come and collect the order of termination from his office. On the strength and basis of this statement, the present Writ Petition has been filed, without producing any such order of termination. To my mind, this Writ Petition is a misconceived one. There is no cause of action for the writ petitioner to approach this Court, as of now. If the writ petitioner’s services have been wrongfully terminated, he will have to invoke appropriate remedy and if the respondents do not terminate his services at all, he cannot approach this Court on an imaginary ground. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 15th July 2009 ksld ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KBJ}