WP/25617/2024 of S NOOR AHMMAD Vs THE GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE URUDU MEDIUM on 11 February 2026

1. S NOOR AHMMAD, S/O.SHAIK MOHAMUD AGED 27 YEARS, WORKING AS CONTRACT PHYSICAL DIRECTOR GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE URUDU MEDIUM VEMPALLI, KADAPA YSR DISTRICT. (NOW CONTRACT EMPLOYMENT CANCELLED)

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE GOVERNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE URUDU MEDIUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL .VEMPALLI, KADAPA YSR DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION, AP.TADEPALLI,GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

::2::

This Court made the following ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief:

“to issue a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus in declaring the action of the 1st respondent in terminating the contractual services of the petitioner through his orders Rc No-Spl/A/2024 dated.23.03.2024, without notice, without conducting enquiry, without reasonable opportunity of hearing ,violative of principles of natural justice, breach of Article 311(2) of the Constitution Of India, punitive and stigmatic in nature, illegal, arbitrary, without any reasonable opportunity of oral hearing, predetermined in imposition of termination, and accordingly set aside the 1st respondent orders Rc No.Spl/A/2024 dated.23.03.2024, with a consequential direction to reinstate the petitioner into service as Physical Director with all consequential benefits, and pass….”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the termination order is based on a news item published in Andhra Jyothi dated 23.03.2024, alleging that the petitioner participated in election campaigning for YCP. Based on the said news report, the Tahsildar and MPDO, Vempalli, conducted an enquiry and submitted a report dated 22.03.2024 holding the allegations as proved. It is further stated that the petitioner had given a written statement admitting participation in the campaign due to lack of

::3::

awareness of the Model Code of Conduct. However, the petitioner contends that he did not participate in any such campaign and that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to him prior to submission of the said report. He further submits that the statement was obtained under coercion, with an assurance that his services would not be terminated, and under a threat that his appointment would be cancelled. The petitioner also asserts that no notice was issued calling for his explanation before passing the termination order and that the entire process was completed in undue haste, without any evidence. Hence, the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside.

4. Considering the above, it is evident from the impugned proceedings that the petitioner was neither issued any show cause notice nor subjected to any enquiry prior to passing the impugned order.

5. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents does not dispute the said fact.

6. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 23.03.2024 and the respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. However, this does not preclude the respondents to initiate

::4::

enquiry on the aforesaid allegation and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:12.02.2026 klk

::5::

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH

WRIT PETITION No.25617 of 2024

Dt:12.02.2026 klk