Telangana High Court
WP/39682/2014 of V. Venkateswara Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 December 2014
R. KANTHA RAO W.P.No.39682 of 2014 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and learned Government Pleader for Medical Health appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAOW.P.No.39682 of 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner, learned counsel appearing for the secondrespondent and learned Government Pleader forMedical Health appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare theaction of the 3[rd] & 4[th] respondents in terminating theservices of the petitioner, who is working as NursingOrderly (Male) in Trauma Care Centre at GovernmentGeneral Hospital, Guntur, as arbitrary and illegal.
The petitioner was appointed as Nursing Orderly(Male) on contract basis in trauma Care Centre atGovernment General Hospital, Guntur, by the 3[rd]respondent. While so, a news item was published in thelocal edition of the News Papers that staff working atTrauma Care Centre of Government General Hospital,Guntur, handed over the dead body of one Y.NarendraBabu to his attendants without following the dueprocedure on 1.8.2014 by taking amount from them.Pursuant to the same, Enquiry Committee wasconstituted to conduct enquiry into the matter. Duringthe course of enquiry, the Enquiry Committee recordedstatements of various persons including Sridevi, who is none other than the sister of the deceased. The saidSridevi stated that the MNOs Venkateswara Rao andNageswara Rao handed over her brother’s dead bodywithout taking any amount. Based on the report of theEnquiry Committee, the 3[rd] respondent terminated theservices of the petitioner vide order dated 7.8.2014. Assailing the same, the present writ petition has beenpreferred.
Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the4[th] respondent, inter alia, contending that the EnquiryCommittee was constituted on 2.8.2014 and detailedenquiry was conducted against the petitioner andothers. The report of the Committee revealed that thedeath of Y.Narendra Babu comes under Non-MLC,hence no post-mortem is required; the nursing orderliesviz., V.Venkateswara Rao and K.Nageswara Rao havehanded over the dead body of Y.Narendra Babu to theattendants even though they know that permission fromthe Casualty Medical Officer and Nursing Staff is to beobtained before handing over the dead body, andP.Srikanth, Nursing Orderly, assisted themunknowingly; J.Sridevi, attendant of the deceasedsubmitted a statement that the Nursing OrderliesV.Venkateswara Rao and K.Nageswara Rao, handedover the dead body without taking any payment.
I have gone through the material papers and thestatements of the witnesses examined by the EnquiryCommittee. The material available on record clearlyindicates that the petitioner was indulged in handingover the dead body of Y.Narendra Babu withoutpermission of the concerned Medical Officer and properdocuments. Admittedly, the service of the petitioner wason contract basis and going to be completed by 9.1.2015. This is not a case where the termination orderwas passed without any basis. The Enquiry Reportclearly indicates that the charge leveled against thepetitioner has been proved in terms of the enquiryreport submitted by the Enquiry Committee. This Courtis not supposed to substitute the views expressed bythe disciplinary authority, who passed the order basedon the enquiry report. Hence, this Court is of the viewthat there is no merit in this writ petition and the same isliable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writpetition shall stand closed.
_____________________
JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
30[th] December, 2014rkk