R. Murali Krishna, v. The State Of Telangana,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.33647 OF 2017 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed challenging the order in Rc.No.A1/95/2017, dated 03-10-2017 issued by the 5th respondent.

Heard Sri G.Narender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 3 and 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though it is termed as notice, in fact it is order of removal without any notice. He also submits that Director of Adult Education also directed the MPDO to issue notice and after following rules in force and take action. But the same was not done. A reading of the impugned order goes to show that without any notice, it was issued.

In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside. It goes without saying that the petitioner is entitled for reinstatement. However, this order will not preclude the respondent-authorities from issuing notice and take action in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. As a sequel to the disposal of this petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J 09-10-2017 Nvl