1. The proceedings of respondent No.2 terminating the services of the petitioner as District Manager (Temporary) under contract employment, are called in question in this writ petition.

FACTS:

2. The facts forming the backdrop of the case are briefly summarized as under:

Respondent No.1 has undertaken selection process for appointment of “Pranganam Officers” on contract basis. In pursuance of the employment notification issued by the respondents, the petitioner applied for the said post. She has appeared for written test held on 11.2.1996 and on passing the written test, the petitioner was called for interview on 10.6.1996. The petitioner was selected as “Pranganam Officer” and was issued appointment order on 20.9.1996, on a consolidated pay of Rs.6,000/- per month for a period of three years. After successful completion of training, the petitioner was posted as Pranganam Officer of Telugu Bala Mahila Pragati Pranganam, at Bommuru, East Godavari District. Though the contract appointment was for three years, the petitioner and six other similarly situated persons, who were appointed along with her, were continued in service of respondent No.1 – corporation.

3. By proceedings No.1081/WCFC/A1/08, dt.20.2.2009, the respondents have fixed minimum time scale, comprising Basic Pay to the petitioner and six others at Rs.9,285/- and Dearness Allowance with effect from 18.2.2009 in the minimum time scale of Rs.9,285 – 19,775 and they were designated as District Managers. The petitioner was posted at Hyderabad and later she was posted as District Manager, at Durgabai Mahila Shishu Vikasa Kendram (DMSVK) at Sangareddy. While working at the said place, the petitioner has received Memo No.4305/WCFC/A1/04, dt.7.1.2010, issued by the Managing Director of respondent No.1- Corporation. It is stated therein that a total number of ten computers along with accessories were installed in the office of the District manager, DMSVK, Sangareddy, i.e., five each on 6.6.2006 and on 18.7.2006. That the same were received by the petitioner and she has endorsed on a challan that the systems were installed and fully working and that on 8.8.2006, M/s. Ram Computers submitted Invoice No.216 to the petitioner who has received 10 copies of Microsoft Windows XP Original Software and 3 copies of Microsoft Office 2003, based on which a sum of Rs.84,760/- was paid by the respondents towards purchase/supply of software to the said M/s.Ram Computers. It is further alleged that when the Managing Director has verified from the present District Manager, DMSVK, Sangareddy, regarding receipt of the CDs she has reported that same were not received by the District Manager and that no such software CDs are available. That since the computers were already installed and working, receipt of the software one month after their installation again appears illogical and suspicious. The Managing Director alleged that the petitioner, who by the time was working as District Manager, at Guntur, has connived with M/s. Ram Computers and others and created documents as if the software was received without actually receiving the same and thereby she was responsible for the loss of Rs.84,760/- to the Corporation which amounts to fraud and financial irregularities. The Managing Director directed the petitioner to show cause why necessary disciplinary action should not be taken against her, within two weeks.

4. The petitioner has submitted her explanation dt.18.1.2010. She has stated therein that as per Bill No.121, dt.6.6.2006 and Bill No.172, dt.18.7.2006, five systems each i.e., ten computers were received from M/s. Ram Computers, that the systems were opened on 18.7.2006 and electricity connections were given. At that time it was noticed that one monitor was defective and it was taken back on 18.7.2006, but the software was not installed. As per Bill No.216, dt.8.8.2006, of M/s. Ram Computers, one CD of Microsoft Windows XP Professional and one CD of Microsoft Office 2003 were supplied