IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2020 of 2009 Between: D. Yadagiri, S/o. D. Kistaiah, E.No. 253387, R/o. 1-151, Subhash Nagar, Kalwakurthy, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 APSRTC, Rep by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Bus Depot, Kalwakurthy, Mahaboobnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.NARSIMHA GOUD Counsel for the Respondents: SRI V.PADMANABHA RAO FOR SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Certiorari to quash order dated 30-08-2008 passed by respondent No.2, whereby the petitioner was removed from service for his alleged unauthorized absence. Though at the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner made strenuous efforts to convince this Court that on the facts of this case, the petitioner need not file a statutory appeal, I have not felt persuaded to accept his contention. The order impugned in this writ petition is amenable for statutory appeal under Regulation 22 of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1967. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of removal is based on the finding that the petitioner is unauthorisedly absent not only during the period between 21-04-2008 and 23-04-2008, which is subject matter of the charge sheet, but also for the later period and that therefore, such a ground cannot be valid. The learned counsel relied upon the judgments of this Court in P.V.Kameswari vs. Depot Manager, APSRTC, Gokavaram Depot, East Godavari District[1], K.S.C.Bose vs. APSRTC, Hyderabad[2] and judgment dated 05-04-2005 in W.A.No.769 of 2005. Having carefully gone through the said judgments, I am of the view that they have no application to the issue arising in the present case viz; whether the writ petition can be entertained ignoring the availability of alternative remedy. The validity or otherwise of the impugned order is required to be gone into by the appellate authority in the statutory appeal. Ordinarily, this Court does not entertain a writ petition filed bypassing the appeal, unless the orders passed are without jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice. It is not the case of the petitioner that he was denied an opportunity in the domestic enquiry or that the order was passed without jurisdiction. If the order imposing penalty is passed after full-fledged domestic enquiry, I do not find any reason to entertain the writ petition. If the order of penalty suffers from any illegality, the same can be pleaded to be rectified in the statutory appeal. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP No.2555 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 18th April, 2009 vrn [1] 2008 (6) ALD 48 [2] 2008 (6) ALD 492