BODDU RATHAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

(2.) The petitioner was selected as Assistant Project Director, Tenali Cluster, District Water Management Agency, Guntur District, in the year 2005, and he has been working as Assistant Project Director till the date of impugned order dtd. 2/1/2014. Due to change of Programme Officer from MPDOs to NREGS staff from March, 2013, the petitioner has been appointed/instructed to take charge of the post of Programme Officer for six mandals for wage seekers. It is also the contention of the petitioner that he has received two awards for best service for the years 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 from the District Collector. Basing on the complaint made by the political party, a Special Social Audit team was appointed and conducted an audit in his absence and the present impugned proceedings came to be passed, vide Proceedings No.1316/SRDS/SPM (DM1)/541/2013 dtd. 2/1/2014. As per the impugned proceedings, one Sri M.Arun Prasad, who was suspended by the District Project Coordinator (DPC) on 7/2/2012 and the petitioner herein appointed the wife of the suspended employee and the suspended employee performed the duties of his wife Smt. Sowjanya as de facto Field Assistant and during her tenure, several irregularities were unearthed in the execution of 43 works in the Gram Panchayat and the deviation in those works was to a tune of Rs.25,43,961.00 and basing on the said audit report, the petitioner herein was terminated. The said termination order came to be challenged in the present Writ Petition on the ground that before terminating the services of the petitioner herein no procedure was followed or issued any show cause notice or conducted any enquiry and it amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and prayed to set aside the impugned proceedings.

(3.) Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent filed counter on behalf of the 3rd respondent and on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and he would submit that the petitioner herein has committed several irregularities and the petitioner herein was appointed on contract basis on 20/11/2007 and it comes to an end on 31/3/2013 and there is no extension of contract subsequent to 31/3/2013 and that the post of Assistant Project Director is a fixed tenure post and a disciplinary case is pending against the petitioner and the contract renewal was kept in abeyance till the case is disposed of. This respondent has decided not to extend the term of contract as per Clauses 4, 25 and 33 of the terms and conditions of the contract agreement, which reads as follows: "Clause No.4: That this contract is a fixed one and there is no commitment on either side to extend the contract. Clause No.25: The FTE further agrees that the Commissioner, Rural Development, Government of A.P. Hyderabad is vested with unfettered power to terminate this contract service order without prior notice in the event of FTE is found to be indulged in financial irregularity directly or indirectly or involved in any criminal case, misbehavior, misconduct or dishonest behavior of any such actions detrimental to the interests of the organization. Clause No.33: Any violation of the conditions mentioned above would result in dispensing with the services of FTE without any notice."