ACHANALA RAMADEVI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Special Officer in Kanekal Kasturbha Gandhi Balikala Vidyalaya(KGBV), Ananthapur district on contract basis for the period of one year vide proceedings Rc.No.545/KGBV/ RVM(SSA)/SOs/2013, dtd. 9/12/2013 issued by the State Project Director, KGBV Society, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, when the state was in unified condition. After the bifurcation, the Rajiv Vidya Mission (SSA) continued the service of the petitioner. At present, the petitioner was working as Principal of Parigi KGBV Junior College, Ananthapur district, since August, 2017. There are about 20 students from 6th to 10th standard and 80 students in the college. Thus, the students studying the Parigi KGBV performed their best in the respective final examinations in the previous years due to the efforts of the petitioner. Due to political influence, some people pressurized the petitioner to appoint their people in the college on so many occasions, but the petitioner did not yield to the pressure. Hence, the political people put troubles to the petitioner in the administration of the college by one way or other by regularly interfering in the affairs of the college. On the influence of political people, ACB Officials raided the Parigi KGBV Junior College on 24/2/2021 and certain allegations were made against the petitioner regarding maintenance of records, quality of the provisions not being uploaded in the Stock Register, shortage of stocks, quality was not up to the standards on some materials. Basing on the said radio message, the 5th respondent issued Show-Cause Notice vide Rc.No.124/B2/KGBV/SCNs/2021, dtd. 25/2/2021 to the petitioner instructing to submit explanation within three days. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 27/2/2021 to the alleged irregularities which were mentioned in Radio Message dtd. 24/2/2021 and Show-Cause Notice dtd. 25/2/2021. Without considering the same, the respondent authorities suspended the petitioner from service of Principal, KGBV Junior College, Parigi vide proceedings Rc.No.1 Spl./B2/KGBV Allegations/SS/2021, dtd. 16/9/2021 after a lapse of five months from the date of issuance of show-cause notice. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and stated that the petitioner has never submitted any representation to the higher authorities about interference of outsiders/political people in college administration. Basing on the radio message, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to submit detailed explanation within three days from the date of receipt of notice. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her explanation stating that maintenance of registers was the primary duty of the accountant but the special officer has to supervise the overall management of the KGBV and she has shown deliberateness in maintaining and supervision of the registers regarding KGBV. It is further stated that regarding the quality of the grocery and essential commodities, it is one of the responsibility of the petitioner to check the quality of the grocery and essential commodities and while receiving any defected material, she has all the right to return them and inform the Higher Authorities, but she has not reported to higher authorities on the quality of the products. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner failed in maintaining administration of college in a proper way and as a Special officer, it is the responsibility of the petitioner to monitor and supervise the staff in proper way, which includes maintenance of Toilets and Bathrooms, Dormitories. But the Special Officer has not brought to the notice of the Higher Authorities regarding the difficulty in maintaining the bathrooms and toilets with the two sweepers, due to increase of students strength. As the explanation of the petitioner was found not satisfactory, the respondents issued suspension order.