(Prayers: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in terminating the services of the petitioner with immediate effect by an impugned order dated 01.12.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice along with Article 14,16,21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service by setting aside the impugned order dated 01.12.2025 and pass such other orders.

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned order passed by the respondent dated 01.12.2025 pending writ petition and pass such other orders.

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to not to issue a fresh notification for recruitment pending writ petition and pass such other orders.

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 16.12.2025 passed in W.P. No.34886 of 2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass such other orders.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Progs No.5/Mission Vatsalya/SAA/2025 dt. 1.12.2025 of the 4th respondent terminating the services of the petitioner and notifying the consequential vacancy for recruitment as arbitrary, illegal, misconceived, violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as manager of Shishugriha, Ananthapur and pay salaries to the staff and pass such other orders.

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned orders of the 4th respondent in Progs No.5/Mission Vatsalya/SAA/2025 dt. 1.12.2025 terminating the services of the petitioner and consequential recruitment notification dt.6.12.2025 and pass such other orders.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Progs. No. 7/Mission Vatsalya/SAA/2025 dt. 1.12.2025 of the 4th respondent terminating the services of the petitioner and notifying the consequential vacancy for recruitment as arbitrary, illegal, misconceived, violative of the principles of natural justice and Article 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as manager of Shishugriha, Ananthapur and pay salaries to the staff and pass such other orders.

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned orders of the 4th respondent in Progs No.7/Mission Vatsalya/SAA/2025 dt. 1.12.2025 terminating the services of the petitioner and consequential recruitment notification dt.5.12.2025 and pending disposal of the writ petition pass such other orders.)

Common Order

1. The Writ Petitions are filed questioning the action of Respondents in terminating the services of Petitioner vide impugned order dated 01.12.2025.

2. As the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is similar Common Order is being passed.

3. The brief facts leading to this case are as follows;

                  Petitioners are working in Sishugruha, Ananthapuramu on contract basis and their posts and dates of appointment are provided in the Tabular Statement below;

                  

4. The Petitioners are working under Mission Vatsalya Scheme and the object of the Scheme is to provide homecare for the abandoned, surrendered and relinquished children/infants and rehabilitate them through legalized adoption as per the norms. Initially, the Sishugruha started functioning in a single room and in the course of time, a new home was constructed by the Rural Development Trust in the memory of Anne Ferrorat Buddappanagar in the year 2018 and eleven (11) persons were sanctioned to Sishugruha for maintenance and smooth functioning i.e., Manager (1), Social Worker/Child Educator (1), Part-time Doctor (1), Nurses (3), Ayahs (6) and Chowkidar (1) on consolidated pay.

5. While so, on 30.08.2025, an infant by name Chi. Niroop was surrendered to the Sishugruha, who was aged 30 days, weighing about 1.75 Kgs. As per the order of Sishugruha Committee, the child was taken to Government General Hospital for check-up on 04.09.2025 and was given immunization. The Doctor is said to have advised to administer A+Z drops, Vitamin D3 drops and feed on Lactozen stage-1 milk. While so, on 01.10.2025, the child Chi. Niroop was suffering from loose motions and was taken to Government General Hospital. The Doctor prescribed oral solutions for 14 days, but on 02.10.2025, the child developed trouble and the Ayah on duty by name Adilakshmi had taken the child to the hospital, but the child was declared dead at 3.20 AM in the intervening night of 02/03.10.2025.

6. Following this tragic incident, pursuant to the instructions of the District Collector, an enquiry was conducted by a Three-member Committee consisting of Project Director, ICDS, DM & HO, Antanpuramu and Prof. & Head of the Department of Pediatrics, GMC, Anantapuramu. A detailed enquiry report was submitted stating that there was negligence in attending to the child. Based on the enquiry report, a show-cause notice was issued to the Petitioners on 17.10.2025 calling upon them as to why their services should not be terminated. The Petitioners submitted their explanation pleading innocence of negligence as well as scope of their responsibility. However, vide impugned proceedings the services of the Petitioners were terminated. Hence, these Writ Petitions are filed.

7. In the Affidavits filed by the Petitioners, it was pleaded that there was no negligence on their part and the Doctor had last attended the Sishugruha on 04.12.2025 and left the organization and there was no site Doctor. It was also pleaded that the salaries of the staff were not paid from July, 2025 and the maintenance grant to maintain the Sishugruha as well maintenance per child was also stopped from April, 2025 and these aspects were not taken note of in the impugned proceedings.

8. In the Counter-Affidavit, reliance was placed entirely on the Three-member Committee’s report for issuing the impugned order.

9. Heard Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, Sri Manikonda Pranay Venkat Chowdary and Sri Md. Ameen, learned counsels for the Petitioners as well as Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-II and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for Respondents.

10. In the enquiry conducted by the Three-member Committee, the statements of all the employees were recorded and thereafter, the opinion of the Enquiry Officers was furnished. The same is extracted below;

                      “Opinion of the Inspection Officers:

                      1. Manager Smt. M. Deepthi lost her administrative grip on Sishu Gruha staff and the staff not followed the instructions of the Manager.

                      2. Even after knowing the child ill health, the Manager did not attend duties claiming DASARA Holiday on 02.10.2025.

                      3. Nurse Smt. Gunavathi did not concentrate on child ill health. She left the child to the Ayas (Helpers) only.

                      4. Observed groupism between the Manager and Social Worker.

                      5. Mission coordinator did not concentrate on Sishu Gruha activities.

                  6. There is only one helper at night duty, Advised at least two persons in duty at night because if any baby got sick, one person can go to hospital and other person will stay with the other babies.

                  7. It has been observed that there is negligence by Aya Smt. Adi Lakshmi for not burping the child immediately after feeding.

                  8. After vomiting the child became unresponsive and helper Adi Lakshmi told that she saw milk coming from the nose of the child may be because of aspiration of milk in the lungs.

                  9. There was negligence by Aya Smt. Adi Lakshmi for not bringing the child to the hospital immediately when the child developed fever and vomiting.

                  10. There was a delay of approximately 54 Minutes in bringing the child to the hospital which might have avoided the death of the child if brought immediately.

                  11. Finally the 3 men committee observed that there is no coordination between the Manager and Sishu Gruha staff and coordinator. All are long standing staff and having work laxity and lack of work dedication.”

11. The above opinion of the Committee would disclose the lack of coordination among the employees of the Sishugruha and the opinion was formulated after visiting and recording the statements of the employees at Sishugruha. This Court can interfere with this opinion only if the same is perverse and wholly without any basis. That is not the case here in this case.

12. As per the statement of the Smt. N. Deepthi, the child developed loose motions on 01.10.2025 and was taken to Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu and the Doctor prescribed medicines. Further, it was stated that the child was healthy on 02.10.2025, shortly thereafter, in the following intervening night, the child expired. The relevant portion of the Statement of the Manager Smt. N. Deepthi is extracted below;

                  “……. The manager stated that the nurse informed her that the child is in good health and there is no issue and also told that she is leaving Sishu Gruha at 7.30 PM.”

                  “…… The manager asked them that what had happened and Adi Lakshmi helper replied that at around 1.30 to 1.45 AM child suffered with loose motions and she took the child to Government General Hospital, Anantapuramu and returned to Sishu Gruha. She told that meanwhile nurse attended to duty in Sishu Gruha to look after the remaining children.”

13. This Statement was echoed by the Nurse Smt. Gunavathi who was said to be in Sishugruha on the intervening night. The Statement of Smt. Adilakshmi to the enquiry committee is as under;

                  “5. State of Smt. Adi Lakshmi, Helper:

                  She stated that she had attended to her duty on 02.10.2025 at 6.30 PM and given milk to the babies who were crying. She gave milk to baby Niroop at 8.30 PM and BIFILAC Powder at 9.00 PM, the baby slept. After that he got temperature and she has given cold sponge. She gave syrup for fever at 12.00 AM. After seeing his crying she gave milk to Niroop at 1.00 AM. Then he got vomiting and again he gave milk and again he got vomiting. At about 1.30 AM she came to Bala Sadan and called them but they did not reply. Again she came to Shishu Gruha and took Niroop and went to Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu in Auto.

                  She stated that she has informed the Nurse and Manager on phone from other person’s cell from the hospital. Doctor told that the baby was dead. She told that she had come to Sishu Gruha alone by walk with the dead baby and kept the baby in the outside room.”

14. Firstly, though it is stated that the child was taken to Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu on 01.10.2025, there is nothing on record to establish said fact. Secondly, It is quite odd that a child who was said to be in good health till 7.30 p.m. on 02.10.2025 expired shortly thereafter. Thirdly, as per the Statements of Smt. N. Deepthi and Smt. Gunavathi, the child suffered loose motions around 1.30-1.45 a.m. While, the Helper Smt. Adilakshmi states that the child vomited at the same time. The child was taken to Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu and was declared dead. On the basis of the Statement of Helper Smt. Adilakshmi, the Three-member Committee opined that death could have been on account of aspiration. This inconsistency in the Statements as to the cause of death and the narration of the employees working in Sishugruha does not inspire confidence in this Court that the employees of Sishugruha were not negligent.

15. In matters relating to employment, it is well known that absolute proof is not required and what all required is preponderance of probability and the same cannot be said to be short, in this case.

16. The argument of Petitioners that the salaries and maintenance were not paid cannot be of avail, when the tragic event is on account of negligence. Though ideally, maintenance and salaries should be paid on time, many a time there are administrative delays in the release of funds, and such delays cannot be grounds to validate negligence.

17. However, the case of Petitioner in W.P.No.34886 of 2025 is slightly different. The Petitioner in the said case was appointed as Social Worker on 03.06.2014 and her charter of duties primarily are filed duties i.e., effective implementation of the adoption services in the District, creating awareness for adoptions, preparing child study report and physical examination report etc., As per her Statement, she attended to the field work on the instructions of Project Director, ICDS and was not aware of the tragic incident.

                  “2. Statement of Smt. V. Lakshmi Devi, Social Worker:

                  She stated that on 28.09.2025 to 29.09.2025 she had attended her field work as per the instructions of the PD, ICDS. On 03.10.2025 also she had attended to field work after entering in movement register at Sishu Gruha and she told that did not know about the issue happened in Sishu Gruha. She added that all information known to Smt. Gunavathi, Nurse and Deepthi, Manager.”

18. While passing the impugned orders of termination, no distinction was made out regarding the role of the Petitioner in W.P.No.34886 of 2025. Though, it was contended that the Petitioner in W.P.No.34886 of 2025 should also attend to the Sishugruha as and when required, but that is subject to intimation given to her. In the Statements of the employees, none has spoken about intimation being given to this Petitioner to attend to duties on the tragic intervening night. Therefore, to put her in the same basket as others does not appear to be correct.

19. For the foregoing reasons, the result of the Writ Petitions is as under;

                  (i) The W.P.No.35921 of 2025 and W.P.No.3689 of 2026 are dismissed as devoid of merit;

                  (ii) The W.P.No.34886 of 2025 is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order dated 01.12.2025 passed by Respondent No.3 vide Progs.No.07/Mission Vatsalya/SAA/2025 and further directing the respondents to re-examine the case of the Petitioner in this case with reference to the nature of her duties;

                  (iii) No order as to costs.

20. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.