P.MURTHY YADAV Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER claims to be the General Secretary of I.N.T.U.C. Young Workers Council. According to him, he is taking up social activities and highlighted various irregularities. It is also stated that he is the President of Visakha Municipal Corporation Employees & Workers Union, Rajiv Time Scale Employees Union of Andhra University and Priyadarshini NMR Employees Union, Andhra University. He contends that Andhra University is without Vice- Chancellors from August, 2007 onwards, and the In-charge Vice Chancellor and in particular, the 5th respondent herein, have been taking major decisions contrary to the provisions of law. He made specific allegations against the 5th respondent.

(2.) ACCORDING to him, attempts were made by respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 to fill the vacancies without any notification and the notice displayed on 17.01.2013, are contrary to law. He alleged that the 5th respondent has taken all his retirement benefits, but is delaying the same to others. One serious allegation against the 5th respondent is that he is trying to reinstate a corrupt Professor, by name Vivekananda Murthy, with the help of the Standing Counsel of the University, by name Dr.P.B.Vijay Kumar, though a writ appeal is pending before this Court. He alleged that the 5th respondent has transferred as many as 300 Colleges without permission of the Executive Council and the same has resulted in huge loss to the University. The appointments made in the Women's Engineering College, Agro Economics Department are also found fault with. Extensive reference is made to non-functioning of the Executive Council. In effect, the petitioner contends that the entire functioning of the University from 2007 onwards is illegal, untenable and he attributed mala fides to various officials.

(3.) AN unfortunate situation prevails in the State, if not in the Country. Every one feels free not only to express views, but also impose them on other organisations including the Government whether or not they have got anything to do with them or have verified the facts from correct sources. The petitioner claims to be a Trade Union leader. One expects him to concentrate on the matters pertaining to workers and labourers and in a given case, he may get relief to many individuals. Visakhapatnam is a place, which has the largest work force in large number of public and private sector gigantic organisations. The field of activity for any Trade Union leader would be optimum and in certain cases, not only an individual but also an organisation may not be adequate to deal with a particular class of work force, not to speak of the entire work force, at that place.