IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that guidelines for outsourcing prohibit the removal of currently engaged employees, emphasizing adherence to principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

(K. Manmadha Rao, J.) :

WP No.18667 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

“… to issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4th respondent in issuing Termination Order in the form of Notice vide ROC No 11/2021/F1 dated 19082021 served on petitioners on 21082021 and also the action of 5th respondent in issuing a Proceedings dated 04062021 and also the Proceedings of 4th respondent in ROC No 11/2021/F1 dated 23062021 addressing to the 3rd respondent / District Collector to appoint new 34 Employees replacing petitioners and 17 others and also the Proceedings of rd respondent vide No PILDCPRK004258120820210908 dated 12082021 appointing 34 new employees is illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the Termination Order issued in the form of Notice vide ROC No 11/2021/F1 dated 19082021 served on petitioners on 21082021 by directing the respondents 4 and 5 to continue the petitioners in their respective posts as Outsourcing Employees and pass…”

WP No.11839 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

“….to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents in terminating/removing the petitioners from employment contrary to their own proceedings issued vide Circular Memo No GADO1 SUOMISC/31/2019SUI dated 20112019 and without any prior notice as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate the petitioners into service forthwith in view of the proceedings vide Circular Memo No GADO1 SUOMISC/31/2019SUI dated 20112019 and pass…”

WP No.27910 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief:

“…..to issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3rd respondent in not allowing the petitioners to work from 19102021 without there being any notice of termination or followed the procedure contemplated under the Government Memo GAD01SUOMISC/31/2019SUI dated 20112019 issued by the 1st respondent and also not paying the salary from 20112020 as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to take the petitioners to work and to pay arrears of salary by treating the gap between 19102021 to till date as continuity of service and pass…”

2. As the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

3. Since the facts in all the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No.18667 of 2021 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

4. The facts of the case are that the petitioners herein have been working as Contract Employees on outsourcing basis for the last 12 years in Engineering & Sanitary Divisions of 4th respondent and they have been discharging their duties with utmost care and caution without there being any complaint from any corner. By virtue of G.O.Ms.No.126 GA (SU-I) Department, dated 18.10.2019 and G.O.Ms.No.136 GA (SU-I) Department, dated 04.11.2019 the 2nd respondent Corporation was incorporated under Section 8 of Companies Act 2013 with an object that it shall act as a “placement Agency for Outsourcing Manpower” by placing outsourced manpower to the Departments/Organizations of Government of Andhra Pradesh, as per their indent/requirements,. The 1st respondent also issued a Circular in Memo No.GADO-SUOMISC/31/2019-SU-1 dated 20.11.2019.

While the things stood thus, the 5th respondent on 4.6.2021 yielding to the political pressure addressed a letter to the 4th respondent to remove 34 employees of their choice, attributing that the petitioners have not been discharging their duties to the satisfact