IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 10695 of 2008 Between: 1 The General Manager, Ordnance Factory Medak, Yeddumailaram-502 205 Medak District A.P., 2 Addl. Director General of Ordnance Factories, Armoured Vehicles Headquarters, Avadi, Chennai-600 054. ..... PETITIONERS AND Shri J. Srikanth Reddy, S/o Hanmanth Reddy Qtr. No.21 LIG, A.P.HB. Colony, Phase, I, Pothireddypally X Roads,Sangareddy-502 295,Medak District, A.P., .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction calling for the records pertaining to OA No. 351 of 2004 in order dt 29-02-2008 and quash the same and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional or pass such any other appropriate order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA) Counsel for the Respondent : NONE The Court at the stage of admission made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.10695 OF 2008 ORDER: ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed ) This writ petition is filed against the order dated 29-2-2008 passed in OA No.351 of 2004 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. 2. The applicant-respondent herein filed the above OA challenging the order dated 8-5-2003 passed by the General Manager, Ordnance Factory Project, Eddumailaram, Medak District, AP-1st petitioner herein imposing the penalty of removal from service as confirmed by the 2nd petitioner herein vide order dated 7-1-2004. 3. The case of the applicant-respondent herein was that he joined Ordnance Factory as Examiner in the year 1994 and he suffered from Lumbago (severe back ache) he was irregular in attendance during the period from 5-3-2002 to 18-4-2002 and from 20-4-2002 to 23-7-2002 except on 22-7-2002 and this unauthorized absence of the applicant was treated as mis-conduct and the applicant was charge sheeted and after conducting ex-parte inquiry he was imposed the punishment of removal from service. The applicant further stated that at the time of entering into service he furnished his address at Brahimwada, Sanga Reddy, Medak District and it was a rented accommodation and subsequently he shifted from the said address to a new address at Pothireddypalli X Road, Sanga Reddy and on shifting to the new address he furnished the same to the petitioners and the new address was also reflected in the identity card issued to him on 1-3-2000. It was the further case of the applicant that as he was sick, and shifted from the earlier address, the correspondence sent by the authorities could not be received by him and he could know about the proceedings initiated by the department only when a paper notification was issued calling for his explanation for his unauthorized absence from his duties and he sought two weeks time as he was undergoing medical treatment. 4. The OA was contested by the petitioners herein by filing counter affidavit wherein it was stated that the notices sent to the applicant on four occasions could not be served and the notices returned with an endorsement “the addressee left without intimation” and therefore the inquiry was held ex-parte after issuing paper publication and the punishment of removal from service was imposed on the applicant. 5. The Tribunal having considered the matter though observed that the applicant was guilty of irregular attendance, but as the total unauthorized absence was less than 14 months and also considering the fact that no notice could be issued to the applicant for want of his correct address and there was confusion as to the correct address of the applicant probably he was away for his alleged severe back ache treatment, as the chargers levelled and punishment imposed was disproportionate, directed the petitioners herein to re-consider the case of the applicant- respondent herein as to the quantum of punishment on a representation to be submitted by the applicant within a time frame. Aggrieved by this order, the Ordnance Factory represented by its General Manager and Addl. Director of General of Ordnance Factories, Avadi, Chennai, have filed this writ petition. 6. Heard learned Asst. Solicitor General of India appearing for the petitioners. Perused the impugned order. 7. Having considered the facts of the case and also the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, we are of view that the Tribunal is justified in directing the petitioners herein to re-consider the case of the applicant-respondent herein on the quantum of punishment imposed on him and, therefore, the impugned order does not warrant any interference by this Court and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage itself. As the time fixed by the Tribunal is now over, we permit the applicant-respondent herein to make a representation within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this and on such a representation being filed by the applicant, the petitioners shall consider and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of two months from the date of receipt of said representation. ______________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ______________________ C.V. Ramulu, J Dated: 10th June, 2008 Nrg. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies