APHC010083132026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3208]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 4605/2026 Between:

1. C HUNDU KARTHIK,, S/O HANUMANTHARAO, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC DATA ENTRY OPERATOR (OUT SOURCING), R/O ITHAVARAM VILLAGE, NANDIGAMA MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT, 521185.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522238

2. T HE COLLECTOR, NTR DISTRICT, VIJAYAWADA. 520001

3. T HE TAHSILDAR, NANDIGAMA, NTR DISTRICT. 521185

4. T HE ANDHRA PRADESH CORPORATION FOR OUTSOURCED SERVICES, (APCOS), REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 2ND FLOOR, NTR ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK, PANDIT NEHRU BUSSTOP, VIJAYAWADA. 520001 ...RESPONDENT(S):

The Court made the following ORDER:

1. 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 action Respondent No. 2 in issuing impugned proceedings vide Rc. Admn-2/487/2025-2 dated 12-02-2026 terminating the services of the petitioner as Data Entry Operator, office of Tahsildar Nandigama without issuing any show cause notice or conducting any enquiry and without giving any reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal. Violation of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to continue the services of the petitioner as Data Entry Operator, office of Tahsildar Nandigama by setting aside the termination proceedings issued by the 2nd Respondent vide Rc. Admn-2/487/2025-2 dated 12-02-2026 in the interest of justice…”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Data Entry Operator (Outsourcing) in the office of the Tahsildar, Nandigama, in the year 2019, and has been working continuously since then. It is submitted that in the year 2021, ACB officials conducted a surprise check in the said office, during which certain amounts of money were seized from the employees, including an amount of Rs.1,000/- found with the petitioner. However, no action was initiated by the Revenue Department at that time, nor was any explanation sought from the petitioner. While the matter stood thus, the 2^nd respondent, vide notice dated 09.12.2025, proposed to terminate the services of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was found in possession of an unaccounted amount of Rs.1,000/- during the said ACB check conducted on 10.12.2021, and called upon the petitioner to submit his explanation. The petitioner submitted his representation dated 11.12.2025 stating that the said amount was carried for purchasing medicines for his aged parents and that it was neither a bribe nor intended for any illegal purpose. However, without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner and without conducting any proper enquiry or affording an opportunity of personal hearing, the 2^nd respondent issued proceedings dated 12.02.2026. It is submitted that the impugned action of the respondents is in clear violation of the principles of natural justice, as no show cause notice, enquiry, or reasonable opportunity was provided to the petitioner. Further, the action has been taken after an inordinate delay of more than three years, without assigning proper reasons for rejecting the explanation submitted by the petitioner. It is also submitted that, as per GAD Circular Instructions, a government employee is permitted to carry an amount of Rs.1,000/- while on duty. Therefore, the action of the 2^nd respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the writ petition.

4. After lapse of four (04) years the respondent authorites have issued notice dated 09