S. SRIDEVI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Micro Irrigation Area Officer on 3/5/2010. the Project Officer APMIP, Visakhapatnam issued notice in Rc. No. APMIP/11/2018 dtd. 7/2/2018 to submit his explanation that the petitioner and another MIAO are supporting M/s. Nagarjuna Fertilizers and company Private Limited and neglecting the other MI Companies basing on the false complaint made by the rival companies. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted his explanation dtd. 13/2/2018 denying the allegations. However, the respondents orally insisting not to attend to duties and the petitioner voluntarily left the job. Thereafter, the Project Director, APMIP, Visakhapatnam issued proceedings in Rc. No. APMIP/73/2015, dtd. 16/4/2018 stating that the petitioner and another person are not eligible for the post of MIAO. However, while fixing the qualification vide Memo dtd. 9/9/2015 the Project Officer clarified that the existing employees could be continued and the existing vacancies are to be filled up with the newly prescribed qualifications. The respondents kept quiet for some time and again issued proceedings on 16/4/2018 without issuing any notice and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed WP No. 16296 of 2018 before this Court and this Court granted interim order dtd. 2/5/2018 suspending the impugned termination order dtd. 16/4/2018 with a direction to continue the petitioner in service for two weeks and the said interim order was extended until further orders.

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent while denying all the averments made in the petition contended that the petitioner is misleading this Court by allegations again that no orders are communicated to her and only the removal orders dtd. 9/2/2020 were prepared to escape the respondents from contempt. In fact the petitioner is the employee of M/s. Paniel Enterprises sponsored to work as MIAO by a contract agreement with the agency. Accordingly, the petitioner's salary was paid by her employer agency M/s. Peniel Enterprises when to whom the petitioner was surrendered on her misdeeds. It is stated that the petitioner was went away from the office on 13/2/2020 AN without acknowledging her surrendered letter issued to the M/s. Peniel Enterprises observing the District collectors orders that to file police complaint on the preparation of fake documents of forgery of signature and obtained sanction for subsidy. The police case is not filed as the petitioner was surrendered to her employer agency and the damages were recovered from the others together involved in preparation of fake lease documents on forgery of signature. It is further stated that the complaint dtd. 16/3/2019 against the petitioner and others prepared fake lease documents and consequences of surrendering her services to her employer is well known to the petitioner since she actively involved in it, but expressing false innocence filing complaints with different allegations at different institutions. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.