Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/20619/2025 of KOLLU HARIKA @ RACHA HARIKA Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 11 August 2026
reserved for orders : -- Date of pronouncement : 12.08.2026 Date of uploading : 12.08.2026 APHC010402222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE 12th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT
Date of reserved for orders : --
Date of pronouncement : 12.08.2026
Date of uploading : 12.08.2026
APHC010402222025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 12th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 20619/2025
Between:
1. KOLLU HARIKA @ RACHA HARIKA, D/O. SRINIVASA RAO
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC EX- JUNIOR ASSISTANT- CUM-DATA PROCESSING ASSISTANT O/O. DISTRICT
FOOD
SAFETY
OFFICER,
OLD
GGH
COMPOUND,
HANUMANPETA, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
MEDICAL
AND
HEALTH
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
AT
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF FOOD SAFETY AND H M AND F
W
DEPARTMENT,
5TH
FLOOR,
APIIC
BUILDING,
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. THE
DIRECTOR
FOR
INSTITUTE
OF
PREVENTIVE
MEDICINE
FOOD
HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION,
A.P.
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. THE
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR,
VIJAYAWADA,
N.T.R.
DISTRICT.
5. THE DISTRICT FOOD SAFETY OFFICER, OLD GGH
COMPOUND,
HANUMANPET
VIJAYAWADA,
N.T.R.
DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders in Rc.No.82/DFSO/NTR/2024, dated 03.01.2025
of the 5th respondent in directing the petitioner to stop attending from office as illegal arbitrary, Stigmatic, and punitive in nature and violative of principles of natural justice without notice, without enquiry and against law laid down by the Hon’ble courts time and again
and
accordingly
set-aside
the
orders
in
Rc.No.82/DFSO/NTR/2024, dated 03.01.2025 of the 5th respondent and consequently direct the respondents forthwith, to reinstate into service of the petitioner with pay all consequential and monitory benefits and pass such other orders.
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner into service as Junior Assistant-cum-Data processing Assistant in the 5th respondent office by suspending the impugned orders in Rc.No.82/DFSO/NTR/2024, dated 03.01.2025
issued by the 5th respondent and pass such other orders.
IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the APCOS, rep. by its managing director as 6th respondent to the Writ petition No.20619/2025, and to pass such other orders.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A RAJENDRA BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
Whether the order is :
Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No
Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION No.20619 of 2025
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:
1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the impugned Proceedings issued by Respondent No.5 vide Rc.No.82/ DFSO/ NTR/ 2024, dated 03.01.2025 directing the Petitioner to stop attending the office and to declare the same as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The Petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant-cum-Data Processing Assistant on 23.03.2017 on outsourcing basis in a sanctioned post and was working in the office of the District Food Safety Officer. Subsequently, the services of Petitioner were migrated to Andhra Pradesh Corporation for Outsourced Services (APCOS) and the salaries were being paid through APCOS. While so, a complaint was made against the Petitioner on 30.12.2024 through PGRS by one Shaik Nazeer, Patamata, Vijayawada, alleging that the Petitioner is intentionally changing the mobile numbers for receiving OTPs for online licensing/renewal and for filing annual returns and thus demanding money and requested to take action against her. On the basis of said complaint, Respondent No.5 i.e., Gazetted Food Inspector & DDO directed the Petitioner to stop attending the office from 01.01.2025 and surrendered her service with effect from the said date to APCOS. Questioning the same, the Writ Petition is filed.
3. In the Counter-Affidavit filed by Respondent No.5, it is stated that on verification of certain license applications in the portal at random in different years, it was noticed that the mobile numbers and mail IDs of the Petitioner and her family members were found to be incorporated instead of mobile numbers and mail IDs of the Food Business Operators. On the premise that the Petitioner has intentionally incorporated her mobile numbers and mail Ids, the impugned order of suspension was passed.
4. Heard the learned counsels.
5. The Petitioner as mentioned above was appointed on contract basis in a sanctioned vacancy and the termination of the Petitioner vide impugned proceedings without issuing any prior notice to the Petitioner, cannot be sustained. Further, the impugned proceedings do not mention any enquiry taken by the Respondents pursuant to the application and the impugned orders were issued as per the instructions of the Commissioner of Food Safety.
6. The Division Bench of this Court in State of A.P., v. K. Madhu Phani and Another [(2018) 1 ALT 125 (DB)] held that even an outsourcing employee cannot be terminated by stigmatic grounds. In the light of above, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following grounds;
i) The impugned order issued by Respondent No.5 vide Rc.No.82/DFSO/NTR/2024, dated 03.01.2025 is hereby
set-aside;
ii) The Petitioner shall be continued in the erstwhile post;
iii) Liberty is given to the Respondents to enquire into the allegations made against the Petitioner;
iv) No order as to costs.
7. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J
Date: 12.08.2026
IS
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION No.20619 of 2025 Date: 12.08.2026
IS