ORDER:

The instant writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following main prayer:

“…to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings in RC No. 7925/B5/2017 dated 08.2017 issued by the 3rd Respondent as highly illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of A.P. Education Act and the Rules made thereunder and without power or jurisdiction and consequently quash or set aside the same …”

Brief Facts of the Case :

2. The case of the petitioners is that the S.K.C.V.S.High School was established in the year 1962 by S.K.C.V.S. Charities, Proddutur, Kadapa District. Right from its institution, the school was admitted into grant-in-aid and recognition was also granted on year to year basis from 1962 to 1978. Thereafter, the school was permanently recognized by the competent authority vide proceedings No.7551/D3/78-1 dated 31.08.1979. While so, on the alleged complaint made by one Mr.D.Veerachari of Proddatur Village of Kadapa District, the 3rdrespondent issued a show cause notice vide R.C.No.7925/B5/2017, dated 03.09.2017 against the petitioners calling upon them to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against them and also sought for the explanation within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of show cause notice. Challenging the said show cause notice, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri A.Venkataramana, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education appearing for the respondents 1 to 4. Perused the material on record.

Arguments of Respective Counsel :

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri A. Venkataramana submits that the 1^st petitioner, who worked as a correspondent of the school, is no more. Hence, no cause of action survives as against the 1^st petitioner. So far as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, he submits that both are working as Secondary Grade Teachers, in S.K.C.V.S. High School, Proddutur, and had challenged the action of the 3^rd respondent in issuing a show cause notice as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned counsel further submits that on 21.09.2017, this Court was pleased to grant an interim stay against the impugned proceedings dated 03.09.2017 and the same has been continuing as on today.

5. On the other hand, respondents have not filed any counter refuting the assertions of the writ petitioners. However, learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education, while supporting the impugned show cause notice dated 03.09.2017 issued by the 3^rd respondent, submits that consequent to the representation submitted by one D.Veerachari, the 3^rd Respondent District Administration caused enquiry by issuing show- cause notice to the petitioners, wherein, all the allegations levied against the petitioners are held to be proved. He also submits that, as per the instructions issued by the 4^th respondent, the instant show-cause notice dated 03.09.2017 has been issued calling for explanation as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioners.

Analysis of the Court :

6. The bone of contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that apparently, the impugned show cause notice issued by the 3^rd respondent is beyond the jurisdiction, as the petitioners 2 and 3 are Secondary Grade Teachers in S.K.C.V.S High School, Proddutur, Kadapa District.

7. In this backdrop of the rival submissions asserted by the respective counsels, this court now ventures into admitted facts involved in the Lis. The 1^st petitioner, who worked as correspondent to the S.K.C.V.S High School, Proddutur, is no more and the instant case now only pertains to the petitioners 2 and 3, who are working as Secondary Grade Teachers in the S.K.C.V.S High School, Proddutur. The impugned notice dated 03.09.2017 was issued by the 3^rd respondent and for the sake of comprehensive view, the s