B. Narsaiah v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order/ direction or any appropriate writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the 4th Respondent in issuing orders vide No.A3/03 t2O25, dl. 0210112025, suspending the petitioner temporarily, pending the enquiry to the memo Lr.no.A9l57l2O24, dt.1611212}24 issued by the Sth respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutiona l, contrary to the principles of natural justice, it is clear violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of constitution of lndia. consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as Field Assistant, and set aside the orders vide No./\3/03/2025, dt. 0210112025 issued by the 4th respondent, in the interest of justic:. lA NO: 1 OF 202s Petition und(ir srection 151 cPC praying that i; the circun stilnces stated in the affidavit filed i.r support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the orde r 'ide No.A3i03 l202S, dt. O2tO1l2O2S issueri by the 4th respondent, pending Jisposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitir:ner : SRI HARI KISHAN KUD]KALA Counsel for the Respondents No.1to4 : Gp FOR SERVICES ll Counsel for the Resp,ondents No.5&6:SRt p.KISHORE RAO, SC FOR Gp,Mp,Zp The Court made thr: following: ORDER THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAIESHWAR RAO WR PE IO o 22 202 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following relief : "...to issue an order/direction or any appropriate writ' more particutarlY one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the 4th Respondent in issuing orders vide No A3/03/2025' dated 02.01.2025, suspending the petitioner temporarily pending the enquiry to the memo Lr. No.Ag/57/2024, dated 16'12'2024 issued by the th respondent, as iltegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional' contrary to the principles of natural iustice, it is clear violation of Articlel4,lgand2lofconstitutionoflndia,consequentlYdirect the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner as Field Assistant' and set aside the orders vide No.A3/03/2025, dated 02'01'2025 issued by the 4b respondent in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. "

2. Heard Sri Hari Kishan Kudikala, learned counsel for the Government Pleader for Services-II for petitioner, learned to 4 and Sri P. Kishore Rao, learned respondent Nos.1 Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. for respondent Nos'S and 6' Perused the material on record' 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appointed as a Field Assistant in Somarampet Village' Ellanthakunta Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District' in 2006 on a yearly contractbasisandhasbeenperforminghisdutywithoutany "-"-l 1 --) 2 remarks. Wh le so, on 76.12.2024, the respondent I'lo 5 issued a memo vide Lr.lk>.A9/57/2024 to the petitioner, based ln complaints from some vi lagers alleging that the petitioner is still :;erving as the BRS party presiilent in the village and involved in iri'e!lularities- at the IKP center. The petitioner submitted an explitnation on

76.12.2024, denying the allegations made in the said rne,Tro.

4. Learnecl :cunsel for the petitioner further sut mits that an enquiry was ini!-ially scheduled on 30.12.2024, but the cc,mplainants failed to atten(l the enquiry, and it is postponed tc C,3.01.2025. However, des;pite the pending enquiry, on 02.01.2021i, respondent No.4 issued s;u:;pension order to the petitioner, citing tt'e need for further investiqation. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted explanations )r 06.01.2025 and 11.01.2025.

5. Learnecl r:ounsel for the petitioner further submits that issuance of su:;pension order is premature, without ,:ornpletion of the pending ernl riry.

6. Learnecl (fovernment Pleader appearing for the rr:spondents submits that tl-re suspension is pending enquiry. llo'vever, the respondents may be directed to complete the encluirl' and pass appropriate o-ders within a reasonable period. -l 1i,. 7 J T.InVieWoftheabovesubmissions,thewritpetitionisdisposed of, directing respondent No'4 to complete the enquiry within a period of eight (B) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by taking into consideration the explanations submitted by the petitioner on 16.12.2024, 06'01.2025 and 11'01'2025' There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any' in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY// SD/.N. SRIHARI AS IS ANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary (Panchayat Raj and Rural Development)' State of Telangand, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner, (RD), Department of Rural Development T9!9!9T1-, - State, DWACRA Buiiding, Opp- Goshala' Gandhinagar' Lower lanK truno' Hyderabad-80.

3. The District Collector, Sircilla, Rajanna Sircilla District' 4. The District Rural Development Officer, District Rural Development Agency' Sircilla, Rajan0a Sircilla District.

5.TheMandalParishadDevelopmentofficer,EllanthakuntaMandal,Rajanna Sircilla District.

6. The Somarampet Grampanchayat, Rep by.its Panchayat Secretary' " $;ilaffi ;i ilrs;, Eiffithl'[,1nia v:ano'al, Raianna Sircilla District' 7. One CC to SRI HARI KISHAN KUDIKALA, Advocate tOPUCl B. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES ll, High Court for the State of Telangana' "fi

9. Two CD CoPies. BSK GJP HIGH COURT DATED:29 tCt1t2025 thf s r.{ ,€ 21 l, rt 2p, ( ( l*.it-. \\\' ,_.:::::?4 ...r.- - J , ORDER WP.No.1622 ctf 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ >1