Administrative actions, particularly termination of service, must be based on a proper enquiry and application of mind; termination based on mistaken identity or failure to verify credentials of the correct individual is legally unsustainable.

ORDER

: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr.A.Phani Bhushan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Naren Rudra, learned Standing Counsel for High Court, appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and perused the record.

2. The present writ petition which has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent. Vide the impugned order, the 3rd respondent passed the order terminating the services of the petitioner from the post of office-Subordinate with effect from 05.12.2025.

3. The whole issue involved in the present writ petition as has been contended by the writ petitioner is that the findings on the basis of which the impugned order of termination has been passed is on verification of the educational qualifications and other antecedents of another candidate of the same name i.e. Talari Santosha. According to the petitioner, there has been no specific enquiry conducted in respect of the petitioner herein insofar as whether she was over qualified for the appointment to the post of office-Subordinate. According to the petitioner, the respondents seem to have got verified the qualification of another candidate based upon the so-called complaint received by the 3rd respondent.
It was here that the counsel for the petitioner strongly contended that petitioner herein namely Talari Santosha’s date of birth is 12.03.1995 and her father’s name is Talari Yesaiah and mother’s name is Ashamma, whereas, the candidate whose qualifications have got verified again is of the same name Talari Santosha, whose date of birth is 02.02.1997 and her father’s name is Talari Sattaiah and mother’s name is Talari Durgamma. The verification seems to have got done in respect of a candidate by name Talari Santosha D/o.T.Sattaiah not Talari Santosha D/o.T.Yesaiah and it was in this context that the counsel for the petitioner has filed the present writ petition contending that the quashment of order dated 04.12.2025 being without proper verification and enquiry and also the allegations not being correct insofar as the petitioner herein is concerned and thus, prayed for setting aside of the same.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for High Court appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 on the previous date of hearing had made a statement that apparently, there seems to be a confusion in respect of the verification that has got done by the respondents, on the basis of which, the impugned order of termination was passed and thus, prayed for an appropriate order to be passed protecting the interest of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to the extent of permitting them to conduct proper verification and enquiry and reserving their right to pass appropriate orders after due verification and enquiry in this regard.

5. Having gone through the material and documents enclosed along with the petition from the set of documents made available by the petitioner before the Bench indicating two persons of the same name Talari Santosha the other details like the date of birth, father’s name being different. With those materials on record, even this Bench is of the firm view that respondent No.3 before passing of the order, prima facie, does not seems to have applied his mind or has carried out preliminary enquiry or verification required insofar as the identification of the petitioner and her credentials are concerned, particularly, when the petitioner’s name in the service record is entered as Talari Santosha D/o.Talari Yesaiah. However, a letter issued by 3rd respondent to the 4th respondent for verification so as to the candidate’s name who has been subjected to