IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.25843 of 2008 Between: K. Sathyavani W/o. K.N.N. Rajasekhar O/o. District manager, APSCSL, Khammam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The APSCSCL, Rep. by its Vice Chairman & Managing Director, 6-3-655/1/A, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguea, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Director & EOED APSCSCL, Khammam, Khammam District. 3 The District Manager, APSCSCL, Khammam, Khammam 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 will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No. P. Admn. 29/(1)/2008 dt. 31-10-2008 of the 2nd respondent in so far as imposing punishment against the Petitioner is illegal and arbitrary apart from the same were issued without power and authority and further declare that the proceedings dt. 13-11-2008 are illegal, and arbitrary therefore liable to be set aside and further declare that the petitioner is entitled to continue as Asst. Gr.I in the office of the District Manaager, APSCSCL, Khammam and pass such order or orders and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.D.LINGA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.25843 of 2008 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. This writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings No.P.Admn.29(1)/2008 dated 31.10.2008 issued by the second respondent imposing punishment against the petitioner and the consequential proceedings dated 13.11.2008, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner is working as Assistant Grade-I in the respondent- Corporation. Since she unauthorisedly absented to the duties, she was placed under suspension. Later, based on the enquiry report, the second respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 31.10.2008 imposing on her punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. Subsequently, the first respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 13.11.2008 transferring the petitioner to the District Office, Vijayawada. Since the petitioner is working in the same place for the last 24 years, in the interest of administration, the respondent Corporation had taken the decision to transfer the petitioner and that as she unauthorisedly absented for the duties, the impugned proceedings dated 31.10.2008 have been passed imposing on her the punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect. In the circumstances, I see no reasons to interfere with the impugned proceedings and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the respondent Corporation, if she is desired so. On such representation being made by the petitioner, the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law. N.V. RAMANA, J Date: 03.12.2008 va