Important Point—Termination of petitioner from service with a specific charge of misuse of funds, forgery of documents is stigmatic in nature.

N. Balayogi, J.

1. This writ petition is being preferred, aggrieved by the orders in O.A.No.3556 of 2014, dated 07-11-2014, passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.

2. In fact, the petitioner Smt. B. Yogeswaramma was initially appointed as Anganawadi Worker in the year 1992. In pursuance of a notification for the post of Supervisor Grade-II, she was selected and joined as Supervisor Grade-II on contract basis in the year 2003. Vide proceedings dated 15-11-2012, the petitioner was transferred from the Office of the CDPO, ICDS Project, Amadalavalasa to CDPO, ICDS Project, Mandasa by the second respondent as per the message of the first respondent dated 15-11-2012 basing on the enquiry report of the third respondent.

3. The case of the respondents is that the petitioner misused SNP Food Stock to a tune of Rs.1,02,149/- by forgery of the signatures of Anganawadi Workers for which she was issued a show cause notice dated 17-11-2012 as to why her service contract cannot be terminated besides recovery of amount from her. The petitioner submitted her explanation dated 03-12-2012 to the second respondent and thereafter, the first respondent issued orders dated 17-11-2012 directing the petitioner to report before third respondent and she was relieved on 20-11-2012 and reported before the second respondent on 20-11-2012.

4. The third respondent-Child Development & Project Officer, ICDS Project, Amudalavalasa, Srikakulam District again submitted a fresh enquiry report dated 26-03-2013 alleging that the petitioner misused SNP Food Stock to a tune of Rs.22,28,611/- for which a show cause notice issued to the petitioner. She submitted her explanation on 27-04-2013 & 24-06-2013 to the third respondent. The third respondent, having not satisfied with the explanations of the petitioner, terminated her Service Contract vide proceedings D.O.Lr.No.1532/A1/2012, dated 23-01-2014 and ordered for recovery of Rs.22,98,611/-. Further directed to launch a complaint with the local police for the offences of tampering of records, forgery, misappropriation, fraud and also misrepresentation of facts and impersonation as per the instructions of the first respondent by orders dated 02-02-2013.

5. Further contention of the respondents is that CCA Rules are not applicable to the other person who involved in the offence along with the petitioner was also terminated from service by proceedings dated 17-05-2014.

6. The material on record clearly shows that one Anganwadi Worker of L.N. Peta submitted a representation on 16-10-2012 to the ICDS Project Director against the petitioner basing on which, the first respondent directed the third respondent to investigate and submitted a report. During enquiry, the third respondent noticed several irregularities and reported to the second respondent about the pilferage/misuse of SNP Food Stock to a tune of Rs.1,02,149/- and forgery of the signatures of the Anganwadi Workers by the petitioner. The first respondent also entrusted the enquiry to the CEO, Zilla Parishad, Srikakulam on the complaints received against the petitioner, who conducted enquiry and submitted report dated 15-11-2012 to the first respondent finding the petitioner and CDPO, ICDS Project, Amadalvalasa are jointly responsible for the misuse of SNP Food Stock who submitted a report on 19-11-2012. Basing on the said report, a fresh notice for the second time dated 06-04-2013 was issued alleging that the petitioner misused SNP Food Stock to a tune of Rs.22,98,611/- and besides recovery of the said amount.

7. A reading of the proceedings dated 13-05-2014 goes to suggest that the Regional Deputy Director WD&CW Department, Visakhapatnam was instructed to finalize the disciplinary action initiated against the petitioner since the Regional Deputy Director is the appointing authority, there is no need to take up common proceedings. Further, as the petitioner is a contract employee, she does not come under APCS (CC&A) and Rules 1991. The second respo