IMPORTANT POINT
A writ of mandamus requires the existence of a legal right and corresponding duty, which was not established by the petitioners.

JUDGMENT :

(G. Narendar, J.) :

Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the respondents.

2. The present Writ Appeal is filed, aggrieved by the order, dated 29.04.2024, rendered in W.P. No.9761 of 2024, whereby the learned Single Judge was pleased to allow the Writ Petition.

3. The parties herein are referred to by their nomenclature before the learned Single Judge.

4. The short point that arises for consideration is whether the Writ Petition is itself maintainable? Secondly, whether any prejudice has been caused to the petitioners by the act of the Mandal Mahila Samaikya, in surrendering the services of the petitioners to the appointing authority namely, the Zilla Samaikya, thereby enabling the petitioners to maintain the relief of Mandamus or Direction?

5. The case of the writ petitioners is that they are the Mandal Mahila Samaikya Cluster Coordinators, who have been appointed for a limited time according to the Zilla Samaikya bylaws and deputed to the Mandal Mahila Samaikya and as per the terms of the temporary appointment orders, they are required to discharge the duties as assigned to them in the form of the job chart and also discharge such duties as may be assigned by the Zilla Samaikya and Mandal Mahila Samaikya.

6. It is the case of the appellant/4th respondent that the writ petitioners, who are all Mandal Mahila Samaikya Cluster Coordinators had indulged in unruly behavior, which shows that they are using abusive language and have been consistently engaging in arguments and thereby harming the execution of the projects entrusted to them. In these circumstances, the appellant/4th respondent, who is the President of the Mandal Mahila Samaikya, has deemed it fit to surrender their services back to the 6th respondent i.e., Zilla Samaikya.

7. It is case of the writ petitioners that the Mandal Mahila Samaikya has no right to release them and surrender their services as Mandal Mahila Samaikya is neither the appointing authority nor the disciplinary authority. In this regard, the learned Counsel would place before this Court the terms and conditions of appointment, which reads as under:

1. Under normal circumstances Mandal Samakhya Cluster Coordinator (MSCC) should perform the duties assigned in the form of job chart. However, without prejudice to the regular responsibilities in the job chart and the rules and conditions contained herein, the Zilla Samakhya/Mandal Samakhya also assign other responsibilities as required. He/she will be on employment for 5 years, extendable by 5 years. The period of employment can be extended up to 58 years to the person if he has worked satisfactorily to the Zilla Samakhya/Mandal Samakhya.

12. District Union may cancel appointment in case of misconduct or corrupt behaviour or non-performance of assigned duties.

18. In relation to the above mentioned conditions and regulations in relation to the appointment, it will be a breach if not individually but as a team, in such cases the district federation has the right to cancel the appointment and dismiss him or her from the job.”

8. We have read the order impugned in the Writ Petition. The order alleged to have terminated their services reads as under:

“Devipatnam mandal differences and clashes have been arose with in the premises of the respective cluster. Those fights have been taking place, they know that since these 3 months. The said people who are with out giving proper respect to the authorities behaving in indecent manner. They are conspiring and scolding in indecent manner. Not only verbal illegal words but also threatening me with dire consequences. Therefore all the four CC have been surrendered to the TPMU. Kindly consider my request.”

9. On a reading of the same, it is apparent that the same has not resulted in the termination of the services and their services have been surrendered to the appointing authority and there being no dispute with regard to the same, the question that arises is whether the proceedi