IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8754 of 2009 Between: K.Ammaji W/o.Haranath Senior DPO office, Vijayawada,R/o.D.No.74-9-6 J.D.Nagar, Opp:Auto nagar Gate, Bandar Road Patamata, Vijayawada,KRishna District ..... PETITIONER AND The Divisional Personal Officer,O/o.D.R.M.,office vijayawada,Krishna District .....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 to issue any writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for the records leading up to passing the impugned of the respondent in his proceedings No.B/P227/IV/2009-/01 datee 20.4.2009 and set asdie the same being without jurisdiction without authority of law and without following the principles of evidence and contrary to the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appellate )rules,1968 and in violation of principles of natural justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.T.S.VENKATARAMANA The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P. No.8754 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed assailing the impugned order dated 20.04.2009 passed by the respondent in proceedings No.B/P227/IV/2009/01 pursuant to the order in C.C.No. 975 of 2005 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. The main grievance of the petitioner is that by the impugned order dated 20.04.2009, the petitioner was called upon to submit her explanation on or before 24.04.2009, as to why the penalty of compulsory retirement from service shall not be imposed on her. The petitioner thus, was given only four days time to submit explanation to the impugned order, which is most unreasonable and insufficient to submit proper explanation. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in the circumstances of the case, the time granted by the respondent to the petitioner for offering explanation is unreasonable and therefore, we are inclined to extend the time. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, granting the petitioner 10 days time from today to offer her explanation to the proposed punishment of compulsory retirement by the respondent. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 28-04-2009 Note: C.C. tomorrow B/o. Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}