Archive · 20 Aug 2026
Court Upholds Staff Terminations After Baby Dies in Care
A one-month-old baby died while staying at a government child-care home in Anantapur.
A committee investigated and said some workers had not cared for the baby properly.
The facility’s manager, nurse and social worker were dismissed.
The workers said they had not been negligent and raised concerns about unpaid salaries and missing maintenance funds.
The court said those administrative problems did not excuse poor care.
It also noticed that the workers gave different accounts of what happened to the baby.
The court upheld the manager’s and nurse’s dismissals.
But it gave the social worker another chance because her main duties were outside the facility and no one showed that she had been called in that night.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the termination of a manager and nurse after a month-old baby died at a state-run Sishugruha.
The baby was surrendered to the facility in Anantapur on August 30, 2025, and died at 3:20 a.m. after becoming ill.
A three-member committee found negligence and a lack of coordination among the facility’s employees.
The court cited conflicting accounts about whether the baby had loose motions or vomited and questioned the explanations surrounding his death.
The court set aside the social worker’s termination because there was no evidence she had been instructed to attend the facility that night.
- Who
- A one-month-old boy, three Sishugruha staff members, a three-member inquiry committee and the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
- What
- The court upheld the termination of the facility’s manager and nurse after finding the negligence conclusion supported, but set aside the social worker’s termination.
- When
- The baby died at 3:20 a.m. after October 1, 2025; the court order was dated August 17, with the year not specified in the article.
- Where
- A state-run Sishugruha child-care facility in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh.
- Why
- The committee found negligence and poor coordination, while the court cited inconsistent employee statements; the social worker’s case differed because no evidence showed she had been asked to report that night.
Staff members’ position
Court and inquiry findings
Responsibility for the death
Staff members’ position
The three women denied negligence and argued that the scope of their responsibilities had not been properly considered. They also pointed to the absence of the doctor who had last attended the child.
Court and inquiry findings
The inquiry found negligence, and the court said the committee’s conclusion was based on its visit and employee statements and was not wholly without basis.
Operational conditions
Staff members’ position
The staff argued that salaries had not been paid since July 2025 and that maintenance funding had been stopped, but these circumstances were not considered in the proceedings.
Court and inquiry findings
The court said salaries and maintenance should be paid on time, but administrative delays in releasing funds could not justify negligence.
Social worker’s role
Staff members’ position
The social worker said her primary duties involved field work and adoption services and that she was unaware of the incident.
Court and inquiry findings
The court found no evidence that she had been instructed to attend Sishugruha on the night of the death and ordered authorities to reconsider her case.
- Facility
- State-run Sishugruha child-care facility
- Location
- Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh
- Child’s age
- 30 days old
- Date surrendered
- August 30, 2025
- Reported time of death
- 3:20 a.m.
- Inquiry finding
- Negligence and lack of coordination among facility employees
- Court outcome
- Manager and nurse’s terminations upheld; social worker’s termination set aside for reconsideration