THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.15895 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Conductor in the A.P.S.R.T.C., in 1997. In the year 2010, she was working in the Avanigadda Depot. On 03-12-2010 a check was effected, and on the basis of the irregularities noticed therein, a charge-sheet dated 06-12-2010 was issued. The petitioner submitted her explanation on 14-12-2010, denying the charges. It was received by the respondents on 19-05-2011. Not satisfied with the explanation, the Depot Manager, Avanigadda, the 2nd respondent herein, appointed an enquiry officer. A report was submitted by the enquiry officer, holding that the charges against the petitioner are proved. Thereafter the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 16-05-2011, proposing the punishment of removal from service. The petitioner contends that she could not submit the explanation on account of the fact that her husband has undergone ‘open heart surgery’ at the relevant point of time and she issued a telegram, requesting extension of time for submission of the explanation. The 2nd respondent passed an order dated 27-05-2011, directing removal of the petitioner, observing that the petitioner failed to submit her explanation to the show cause notice. The petitioner challenges the said order mainly on the ground that she was not given an opportunity of being heard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner is mostly about the denial of opportunity to submit the explanation to the show cause notice dated 16-05-2011. The petitioner has placed before this Court, the medical report, pertaining to her husband. She has categorically stated that open heart surgery was conducted upon her husband at the relevant point of time. On receipt of the show cause notice, the petitioner submitted representation dated 25-05-2011 with a request to grant time, up to 10-06-2011. There is no reference to this representation. The reasons pleaded by the petitioner for extension of time, for submission of the explanation cannot be said to be without basis. The petitioner cannot be expected to submit explanation, when her husband was in hospital for operation. The fairness demands that the version of the petitioner for the second show cause notice be taken into account. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order dated 27-05-2011 passed by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner is granted 15 (fifteen) days time from today to submit her explanation. The 2nd respondent shall take the same into account and pass fresh orders within four weeks thereafter. The petitioner shall be deemed to be under suspension, till such time. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.11-08-2011. KO