(1.) THE petitioner was working as Marketing Officer in the A. P. State Handloom Weavers Co-operative society Limited, the 2nd respondent herein. He was removed from service vide proceedings dated 17. 3. 2008, issued by the 2nd respondent. The same is challenged in this writ petition.
(2.) A charge memo dated 18. 3. 2000 was issued to the petitioner, whereunder it was alleged that he incurred expenditure contrary to the settled norms, and allowed a contractor to lift certain items, in violation of the terms of contract Petitioner submitted his explanation on 6. 10. 2000. A show-cause notice was issued on 12. 2. 2002, stating inter alia that the Inquiry Officer submitted a report on 31. 12. 2001, and accepting the findings, the punishment of dismissal from service is proposed. On receipt of the same, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 5. 4. 2003. According to him, no inquiry was conducted, much less an opportunity was given to him. He has also requested that the copy of the report of the Inquiry Officer dated 31. 12. 2001 be furnished to him.
(3.) THROUGH memo dated 17. 4. 2003, the respondents forwarded a copy of the so called report of the Inquiry Officer. The petitioner in turn, made a representation dated 30. 4. 2003, stating that no inquiry, as contemplated under Bye-law 48 was conducted and that the report cannot constitute any basis for the disciplinary action.