LAWS(APH)-2023-1-36

CH. SRIDEVI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

Decided On January 03, 2023
Ch. Sridevi Appellant
V/S
STATE OF A.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioners from attending the duties without passing any orders, is illegal and arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 7, and learned counsel for the 8th respondent.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were appointed as Cluster Level Resource Persons in the years 2014 and 2015 after due process of selection. The nomenclature of Cluster Level Resource Person is called as Community Organiser. While so, the respondent authorities issued a notification calling for applications for appointment to the post of Community Organiser from the candidates who are already working. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioners submitted applications and they were selected and appointed as Community Organisers in the month of November, 2017 and they were posted to Tadepalligudem Municipality, Jangareddygudem Nagara Panchayat and Kovvuru Municipality respectively. Since then, they have been discharging their duties to the utmost satisfaction of the superior officers and there are no adverse remarks against them. Though there is a regular nature of work, the petitioners were termed as outsourcing employees. While so, the petitioners received a notice dtd. 9/7/2018 issued by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, West Godavari, directing the petitioners to attend an enquiry on 10/7/2018 along with relevant certificates, since some persons, who could not get considerable marks for appointment in the selection process, made a complaint against them. Accordingly, the petitioners attended the enquiry. As no orders are passed by the respondents, the petitioners are under the impression that the respondents might have dropped further course action against them in pursuance of the subject enquiry.