IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6682 of 2008 Between: 1 Swayam Krushi Mahila Samithi, Nehru Nagar rep.by its President B.Rajeswari, W/o.Bhaskara Rao R/o.Nehru Nagar, Ongole Prakasam District 2 B.Rajeswari W/o.Bhaskara Rao R/o.Nehru Nagar, Ongole Prakasam District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 State of Andhra pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary to Education Department, Secretariat, saifabad, Hyderabad 2 The Mandal Educational officer,Ongole Prakasam District 3 The Tahsildar, Ongole Mandal, Prakasam District 4 The Headmistress, Mandal Parishad Primary School Nehru Nagar, Ongole Prakasam District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ ofmandamus declaring the order in RCA.No.851/2006 dated 25.2.2008 passed by the 3rd respondent as illegal, irregular arbitrary, and against principles of natural justice and offends articles, 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioners cooking agency for cooking mid day meals and serve the students of 4th respondent school and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : O R D E R: This Writ Petition has been filed by petitioners who are two in number assailing the proceedings of 2nd respondent-Mandal Education Officer, Ongole in RCA.No.851/06, dated 25.2.2008 whereby and where under the cooking agency for cooking of mid day meal and serve students of 4th respondent-Mandal Parishad Primary School, Nehrunagar, Ongole has been cancelled. This is second journey of the petitioners to this Court. Earlier the petitioners filed W.P.No.19828 of 2006 assailing the order dated 28.9.2006 passed in RCA.No.837 of 2006 canceling the agency given to the petitioners for cooking food and supplying the same to the 4th respondent school. The said writ petition was disposed of on 5.4.2007 directing the petitioners to submit their explanation. The relevant portion of the order in the said writ petition reads as under: “ Inasmuch as the petitioner society was entrusted with the job of cooking as an agency, it may not have any right to continue as such. But, however, when allegations are made, a show cause notice was issued to her and merely on the ground that she was not available at her residence, the same was afided on the door of the petitioner’s house on the next date i.e. on 26.2.2006 and thereafter the impugned order was passed. In view of the allegations made, by all fairness, one more opportunity should have been given by making a notice being served on the petitioner. Though it is stated in the counter that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, not even a reference is made to the issuance of such a notice in the impugned order canceling the agency. Further, it is stated that in view of the interim orders of this Court, the petitioner is functioning as the cooking agency as of now. IN that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 28.9.2006 and remit the matter for fresh consideration by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ongole. Inasmuch a copy of the show cause notice is served on the learned counsel for the petitioners, the same shall be treated as service on the petitioners. The explanation, if any, to the said show cause notice shall be filed within a period of three weeks from today in the office of the 1st respondent and if such an explanation is filed, the 1st respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within two weeks thereafter. It is also made clear that if no explanation is filed within the time indicated above, it is open to the respondents to pass orders on merits and indicate the same to the petitioner. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.” The petitioners did not chose to submit any explanation to 3rd respondent. Thereupon, the 3rd respondent proceeded to pass the orders impugned in this writ petition. The writ petitioner despite giving opportunity by this Court in the earlier round of litigation to submit explanation did not choose to avail the same. The 3rd respondent considered the material placed before him and passed the order impugned in this writ petition. I do not see any flaw in the order passed by the 3rd respondent. In view of the above, this writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. No costs. 21st August, 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.6682 OF 2008 21ST AUGUST 2008