A. GOPAL REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THE writ petitioner assails the proceedings No. Ty/95 (4)/2000-AKP/ dated 28th July, 2000 issued by the respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and disproportionate to the charges alleged against the petitioner. ( 2 ) AFTER hearing the Counsel for the petitioner, in order to ascertain whether the authorities have violated the principles of natural justice while issuing the impugned order, this Court, without going into the merits of controversy, ordered notice before admission on 14-11-2000 permitting the counsel for the petitioner to serve notice on the respondent by Registered Post with acknowledgment Due. Accordingly, the learned Counsel for the petitioner served the notice on 14-11-2000, which was received by the respondent on 22-11-2000. A memo to that effect was also filed and the same is made part of the Court record. In spite of service of notice, none appears for the respondent. Therefore the matter is decided basing on the material available on record. ( 3 ) IT is stated in the affidavit that while the petitioner was discharging his duties as conductor on the route Anakapalli to payakaraopet on 4-2-2000 and while he was about to issue tickets to the passengers, a check was made at stage No. 14 at about 21-30 hours and thereafter a charge-sheet was issued on 29-2-2000 and an enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer, without even giving reasonable opportunity to defend the case, submitted his report on 27-5-2000. Thereafter, a show- cause notice dated 15-7-2000 has been issued to the petitioner proposing the punishment of removal from service of the corporation and his written explanation should reach the office within seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of the said notice and the said show-cause notice was served on the petitioner on 24-7-2000. But before the expiry of seven days time granted for submitting any explanation to the show-cause notice, the authorities by the impugned orders dated 28-7-2000 imposed the punishment of removal from service. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. ( 4 ) AS seen from the impugned order, in reference No. 11 show-cause notice dated 15-7-2000 was issued to the petitioner and the same was acknowledged by the petitioner on 24-7-2000. The petitioner is likely to be retired on 31-7-2000. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. ( 4 ) AS seen from the impugned order, in reference No. 11 show-cause notice dated 15-7-2000 was issued to the petitioner and the same was acknowledged by the petitioner on 24-7-2000. The petitioner is likely to be retired on 31-7-2000. But without waiting for the explanation of the petitioner, the impugned orders are passed. It is needless to say that when once the authorities have given an opportunity to submit the explanation of the petitioner within seven days, the authorities ought to have waited till the expiry of seven days time granted in the show-cause notice. In fact, the petitioner stated that he submitted his explanation on 29-7-2000 and the authorities by the impugned order dated 28-7-2000 imposed the punishment of removal from service in utter violation of principles of natural justice. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside as not est in the eye of law. ( 5 ) THE writ petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.