THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21070 of 2010 O R D E R: Heard Sri K. Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation. This Writ Petition has been instituted by a Conductor, challenging the notice issued by the respondent on 05.07.2010, calling for her explanation within a period of seven days as to why the punishment of removal from service should not be imposed on her, on the premise that the allegations levelled against her and enquired into have been found true. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner, Sri P. Venkateshwara Rao, strenuously submits that the very factual basis upon which the entire set of allegations have been levelled against the petitioner has been knocked down by the representation/submission made by Sri P. Narayana, ADC on 27.02.2010, admitting that he has committed a mistake in issuing bundle of tickets improperly to the petitioner and hence, the petitioner is not responsible for these allegations levelled against her. I am afraid that the High Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot substitute its opinion on pure questions of fact to that of the competent disciplinary authority. All the facts are liable to be brought to the notice of the disciplinary authority and thereafter, the disciplinary authority is required to apply his mind independently to such submissions and then decide either to accept or not to accept them for valid and cogent reasons. Against a show cause notice, a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution is entertained in exceptional circumstances, namely where the authority who issued such a show cause notice lacks competence or where the authority who issued the show cause notice has proceeded in utter violation of the principles of natural justice or where the authority who has issued the show cause notice has proceeded in utter disregard of a provision of law. Neither of the above said aspects is attracted in the present case. I, therefore, do not consider this to be a fit case for entertaining the Writ Petition. The leaned counsel for the writ petitioner, however, submits that no final orders are passed so far by the Depot Manager pursuant to the impugned show cause notice and the petitioner may be accorded ten days’ time from today to submit her detailed explanation and the respondent be directed to take the same into account and consideration and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Since the last request appears to be a reasonable one, this Writ Petition is disposed of subject to the writ petitioner filing her explanation to the show cause notice on or before 03.09.2010 before the respondent and the respondent will take the same into account and consideration and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, if the respondent has not passed any final orders so far, as was asserted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner at the Bar. No costs. --------------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 24th August 2010 Note: Issue CC in three days. ksld