IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.17582 OF 2011 Between: Vendi Jhansi ..... Petitioner AND The State, Rep. by the District Collector, Warangal & 2 others ..... Respondents The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.17582 OF 2011 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the third respondent in issuing the impugned suspension order, dated 26.03.2010, without notice and due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as a Field Assistant, Mallampalli Village, Duggondi Mandal, Warangal District, as per the rules of Andhra Pradesh Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (for short, “A.P.R.E.G.S”) . 2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition are as follows: The petitioner was appointed as Field Assistant of Mallampalli Village, Duggondi Mandal in A.P.R.E.G.S in the year 2006. On 26.03.2010, the third respondent i.e., Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Duggondi, issued show cause notice under the political leader’s influence and suspended the petitioner from service without any reason. After receiving the show cause notice, the petitioner submitted her explanation to the respondents on 06.04.2010. On 06.04.2010, the workers of the A.P.R.E.G.S submitted a representation along with their signatures stating that there is no mistake on the part of the petitioner, but some of the rivals of the petitioner gave false statement to the Social Audit Team and the workers requested the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner. On 28.09.2010, the Gram Panchayat of the Mallampalli passed a resolution in favour of the petitioner and requested the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner, but the respondent authorities did not consider the Gram Panchayat’s resolution, workers’ representation and the petitioner’s explanation. The petitioner approached the respondent authorities several times and brought to their notice regarding her innocence and requested to reinstate her. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no enquiry was conducted and that the petitioner gave a representation to the third respondent who has to take appropriate decision on the representation. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents also contended that appropriate decision has to be taken by the third respondent in accordance with the rules and regulations of the A.P.R.E.G.S. on the representation of petitioner. 5. When appeal is provided for as per the Government orders governing the service conditions of the Field Assistant, necessarily the appeal has to be filed before the District Collector. Since the third respondent is not the competent authority to take appropriate decision, the third respondent is directed to forward the representation of the petitioner to the first respondent i.e., the District Collector, Warangal, and the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with the rules and regulations of the A.P.R.E.G.S within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of representation from the third respondent and communicate the same to the petitioner. 6. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (K.C.BHANU, J) Dated: 27th June, 2011. KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.17582 OF 2011 27th June, 2011 KL