THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 17314 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner was employed as Driver, on contractual basis, in Visakhapatnam Rural Depot, of APSRTC. The 2nd respondent terminated the services of the petitioner, through his proceedings dated 7.6.2008. It was stated that a preliminary enquiry was conducted through Assistant Manager (Traffic), Visakhapatnam, and a report dated 26.5.2008, had indicated certain acts and omissions, on the part of the petitioner, that had the effect of tarnishing the image of the Corporation. Invoking certain clauses in the contract of appointment, the 3rd respondent terminated the petitioner‘s service. The petitioner made an appeal/representation to the 1st respondent, against the order of termination, on 16.6.2008. His grievance is that no action has been taken thereon. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner availed the remedy of appeal, against the order of termination. Though it cannot be said that there was undue delay, on the part of the 1st respondent, in dealing with the appeal presented by the petitioner, it needs to be noted that the petitioner is put to hardship, on account of the fact that he is out of service. This court is of the view that the 1st respondent needs to expedite the disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to examine the appeal presented by the petitioner, with reference to the relevant record, and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ 8th August 2008 PAN