IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4655 of 2009 Between: Smt. P.V. Kumari, E-750735, Conductor, D/o. Garidial, APSRTC, Paderu Depot, R/o. Paderu, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The APSRTC, Rep by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The APSRTC, Rep by its Regional Manager, Visakhapatnam Region, at Visakhapatnam. 3 The APSRTC, Rep by its Depot Manager, VSP & Paderu, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in proposing to impose harsh punishment of removal from service on allegation of Cash and Ticket irregularities vide Proc. No. P2/95 (124) / 08-PDR, dated 11-2-2009 as high handed and arbitrary action, contrary to Regulations, violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India, and as such liable to be set aside in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to treat the suspension period as on duty. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondents : MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is a conductor in APSRTC, Paderu Depot, Visakhapatnam District. Disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against her for cash and ticket irregularities. An Enquiry Officer was appointed, who conducted enquiry and submitted his report. Thereafter, basing on the enquiry report, the petitioner has been called for to make written submissions to the enquiry report. After considering the written submissions of the petitioner to the enquiry report, the Depot Manager, APSRTC, VSP & Paderu Depot, Visakhapatnam-3rd respondent issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner proposing the punishment of removal from service. The said show-cause notice is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC received notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents Corporation. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the proposed punishment is not warranted in view of the charges leveled against the petitioner. The learned counsel took me to the accusations leveled against the petitioner. 5. The question whether the proposed punishment is disproportionate cannot be examined basing on the show-cause notice proposing punishment. The petitioner has to submit her explanation to the show- cause notice proposing punishment and then invite final order. Therefore, the invocation of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage is misconceived. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. However, the petitioner has to submit her explanation to the show-cause notice within a week and thereafter, the 3rd respondent has to pass final orders. No costs. ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:06th March, 2009. Note: Issue C.C. within two days. B/O cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI}