Termination of services under disciplinary rules must be proportionate to the misconduct, with due consideration of minor penalties.

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the 3rd respondent proceedings R.C.No. 15/2021/SPL. Social Audit/DVC, dated 19.04.2021 in terminating the petitioner as FTE which is confirmed by the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority vide proceedings No. 1187/SRDS/PM-HR/2021, dated 14.12.2021 as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and also against the Norms of the Public Policy and principles of natural justice and to set aside the same and are contrary to the disciplinary rules for FTEs of SRDS (2021) and to issue a consequential direction, directing the respondent authorities to restore petitioner services as APO of East Godavari District under the fixed tenure employee and pass such other orders....”

2. Heard Mr. Venkateswara Rao Gudapati, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader, Services-IV for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has been appointed as Additional Program Officer (APO) under contract agreement, initially for a period of one year and the same is being continued for the past 15 years and she allotted to work at East Godavari District for executing the works under the respondents, duly providing wage employment opportunities in the rural areas. While the matter stood thus, basing on the allegations made by the financial audit with regard to financial irregularities the 3rd respondent issued show cause notices dated 23.02.2021 and 19.03.2021, for which she submitted explanation. The disciplinary authority, the 3rd respondent has passed an impugned order dated 19.04.2021 terminating the services under Rule 5.22 of The Disciplinary Policy for FTE’s of SRDS Rules, 2013. Aggrieved by the same, she has preferred an Appeal before the 2nd respondent, who in turn confirmed the order of the 3rd respondent.

Questioning the same, the present writ petition came to be filed.

4. Per contra, 3rd respondent filed counter-affidavit denying all material allegations made in the writ affidavit and mainly contended that the petitioner was appointed as APO on contract basis in the year 2007 under MGNREGS Scheme and same is being extended from time to time and it comes to an end by 30.06.2021. The relationship between the parties are purely contractual. An adverse news item was published on 25.12.2020 regarding non-payment of wages to the MGNREGS wage seekers in Chirathapudi Gram Panchayat, Ambajipeta Mandal, East Godavari District. The 3rd respondent has conducted preliminary enquiry and submitted a report to the Commissioner, who in turn constituted the State Level Team to conduct open enquiry into the details of the news item and allegations made by the Human Rights Forum. The State Level Team has submitted a report on 31.12.2020 duly proposed to conduct special Social Audit on this item. Basing on report of the Joint Commissioner, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings temporary out of contract with the show cause notice dated 23.02.2021. The petitioner has also submitted an explanation dated 01.03.2021 and attended personal hearing on 04.03.2021. Again issued show cause notice on 19.03.2021 and the petitioner has in turn submitted an explanation dated 27.03.2021. It is further contended that the wage employment was provided to the wage seekers. The payment will be made to them within a period of 15 days as per Circular dated 03.10.2013 or else the wage seekers are entitled to claim interest. The wage seekers are provided work with different I.D numbers after completion of six months, the wage seekers are not received the wages. It shows that there is negligence on the part of the petitioner. The 3rd respondent after careful examination of entire records, it was detected that the petitioner was violated