High Court for State of TelanganaWP/8154/2015dismissed no costs

M Upendra v. A P Southern Power Distribution Corporation

2015-11-23P Naveen Rao3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN

Present

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.8154 of 2015 Between:

M. Upendra.

.. Petitioners AND A.P.Southern Power Distribution Corporation, rep. by its Assistant Engineer (Operation) Srirangarajapuram, Chittoor District and others. .. Respondents

The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.8154 of 2015

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

2. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition disclose that the Southern Power Distribution Corporation entered into an agreement with the

4th respondent for maintenance of Sub Station at Sindhu Rajpuram. As part of the said agreement, petitioner was engaged and was continuing his duties and responsibilities entrusted to him by the contractor in the Sub Station. This writ petition is instituted basing on the ground that the petitioner is not allowed to work in the respondent company by the contractor on the alleged ground that he was involved in a criminal case and such action of the respondents is illegal.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though initially petitioner was arrested, he was subsequently released on bail and even then, he is not allowed to discharge his functions.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 3 has produced a letter dated 28.11.2014 issued by M/s.Sharon Electricals, the private contractor, which discloses that the petitioner was not traceable and did not attend to duties and that as the petitioner was involved in a crime, his services were terminated. This letter would disclose that the services of the petitioner were terminated by the contractor. Since the 4th respondent is a private person, no relief as sought for in the writ petition can be granted against a private individual. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any such termination, he has to workout his remedies as available under law.

5. Leaving it open to the petitioner to workout his remedies as available under law, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand dismissed.

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 23rd November, 2015 sj